ADVERTISEMENT

If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.

It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.

Wiley InterScience

Risk Analysis

Risk Analysis

Volume 17 Issue 4, Pages 489 - 498

Published Online: 29 May 2006

© 2010 Society for Risk Analysis



< Previous Abstract  |  Next Abstract >

Save Article to My Profile      Download Citation      Request Permissions

Abstract |  References  |  Full Text: PDF (Size: 1007K)  | Related Articles | Citation Tracking

Mixed Messages in Risk Communication
Cynthia G. Jardine 1 2 Steve E. Hrudey 1
  1 Eco-Research Chair in Environmental Risk Management, Environmental Health Sciences Program, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G3, Canada.
  2 To whom all correspondence should be addressed.
Copyright 1997 Society for Risk Analysis
KEYWORDS
Concepts • technical • colloquial • meaning • confusion

ABSTRACT

The exchange of risk information between risk managers and affected parties is frequently hampered by differences in the understanding or interpretation of many words and phrases. Much of the terminology used by risk practitioners may have different "technical" and "colloquial" meanings, resulting in "mixed messages" in risk communication. Several words and concepts commonly used in risk management that may be resulting in these "mixed messages" are discussed. These include primary underlying concepts, such as the various meanings of the word "risk" itself, as well as the perplexity of the notions of "safety vs. zero risk" and "probability". The potential "mixed messages" of the derived concepts of "significant vs. nonsignificant", "negative vs. positive results", "conservative assumptions", "population vs. individual risk", "relative vs. absolute risk", and "association vs. causation" are shown to range from mild confusion to the completely opposite interpretation of these words and expressions. Suggested strategies for recognizing and mitigating the use of words and phrases which may create unnecessary confusion are presented.


Received June 19, 1996; revised April 29, 1997

DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER (DOI)
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1997.tb00889.x About DOI

Related Articles

  • Find other articles like this in Wiley InterScience
  • Find articles in Wiley InterScience written by any of the authors

Wiley InterScience is a member of CrossRef.

Cross Ref Member


Hot Topic
RISK

Risk Analysis


CLICK HERE to read the sample issue.

Business & Management