Risk as Value: Combining Affect and Analysis in Risk Judgments

Studies of public perceptions of hazardous activities and technologies include a wide range of approaches. One approach—"risk‐as‐analysis"—emphasizes the human capacity for analytic deliberation. A second approach—"risk‐as‐feelings"—emphasizes the tendency for people to rely on affective reactions. In this paper we expand and link these approaches by adopting a "risk‐as‐value" model, emphasizing that responses to risk result from a combination of analysis and affect that motivates individuals and groups to achieve a particular way of life. Derived from dual‐process theories, the risk‐as‐value model implies that differences in perceived risk may arise from differences in the analytic evaluation of a risk, differences in the affective evaluation of a risk, or the way these evaluations are combined. We discuss the goals of dual processes in comprehensively governing the valuation of risk information in order to achieve desirable outcomes. We highlight the importance of model‐based research and the need for researchers to look for converging evidence using multiple dependent measures and methods. Implications for risk communication are discussed.