PEP-3E.
Cognitive Dissonance; Heuristics & Logical Fallacies in Risk Perception: Why it’s so natural for so many to believe so much that is so wrong. JT Bushberg*, NCRP
; JT Bushberg
Abstract: Public resistance and fear of radiation is not a new phenomenon. Research on affective influences on public opinion suggests cognitive influences compete with various emotional variables in their influences on public perceptions of risk from technology employing ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. Specifically, people are often influenced by more affective aspects, such as concerns or fears, which are more a function of the potential severe outcomes or of the vividness of potential risks rather than of objectively quantifiable probabilities or expectations. Even though cognitions, such as levels of scientific knowledge and education, are related to public support for radiation-related technology, they alone cannot fully explain the variations of public opinion on these issues. There is a significant body of literature that has empirically examined the influences of cognitive dissonance, heuristics, and logical fallacies in greater detail. This line of research has shown that (1) affective processes often precede cognitive evaluations and (2) people’s judgments about science and technology are sometimes based not on analytical judgment but on a general feeling about science and technology. The seminal research of Paul Slovic, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, and others on intuitive toxicology can be used as a starting point. An overview of these topics will be presented along with specific recommendations aimed at increasing the effectiveness of communicating the risks of radiation exposure in a public forum.
|
