Psychometrics/psychometric studies

Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., and Combs, B. 1978. How safe is safe enough A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sci. 9, 127-152. 

Psychometric studies of public perception of risk have shown that dangers associated with radioactive contamination are considered the most dreaded and among the least understood hazards (Slovic, 1987). Fear of the risks associated with nuclear power and associated contamination has had important effects on pohcy and commercial decisions in the last few decades. In the US, no... 

Rehnstrom, S., Simert, G., Hansson, J.A., Johnson, G., Vang, J. Chronic hepatic encephalopathy. A psychometrical study. Scand. X Gastroenterol. 1977 12 305-311... 

Of importance is that some hereditarian psychometricians are fond of measuring behavioral and IQ differences between various racial and ethnic groups and then offering us conclusions about how genes determine behavior and IQ.17 Do such psychometric studies of heritability of behavior and IQ involve adequate controls for prenatal environment They do not. 

What you should remember when reading psychometric studies of risk perception... 

ABSTRACT This paper presents briefly the psychometric paradigm of risk perception and highlights the presuppositions and criticisms that can be addressed to these works. The mains criticisms concern the sampling, the type of questionnaires used in psychometric studies, the treatment of the data - particularly, the use of aggregated values the status of correlations and factors, and the interpretation of the results. Leads are suggested in order to mitigate some of these criticisms. 

In this respect, the psychometric paradigm , which occupies a dominant position since the late seventies, turns out to be a valuable resource. Basically, the methodology of all psychometric studies is structured in five steps the design of questionnaires, the selection of the population sample, the administration of questionnaires, the statistical analysis of the data, and the interpretation ofthe results. Each of these steps implies lund ental presuppositions, which have drastic consequences on the interpretation of the results. It is therefore absolutely necessary for the risk manager to be aware of these presuppositions. Likewise, several criticisms can be addressed to psychometric smdies. These also have to be highlighted in order to avoid a misuse of the results. 

This communication displays three distinct parts. The first part presents a brief history of the psychometric paradigm and its value for the risk manager. The second part exposes the general methodology of psychometric studies. The last part outlines presuppositions and criticisms the risk manager should be aware of when using psychometric results. 

Recent psychometric studies considerably enlarge the field of research. 

The methodology of classical psychometric studies of risk perception can be composed of five phases. 

As in all psychometric studies, the authors select the population sample, which is supposed to be randomly... 

Without any specific mention, the presuppositions and criticisms highlighted in this section concern the classical psychometric studies focusing on the role of psychometric characteristics in risk perception. 

First, a fundamental presupposition is underlying the psychometric studies of risk perception the idea that risk perception in itself is quantifiable. Even if other considerations are taken into accoimt - such as the qualitative characteristics of risks - the researchers of the University of Oregon suppose that all these data - including the qualitative characteristics - may be represented by a set of numerical values. This quantified conception of risk perception reveals a reductionist approach to risk, unable to accoimt for a polythetic concept of risk such as the one advocated... 

Furthermore, the results of psychometric studies consist in fact in a representation of risk perception (Hottois 2001). 

In most psychometric studies, the researchers do not specify in their questionnaires who is supposed to be exposed to the risk. Yet Lennart Sjoberg has shown that the answers are considerably different when the risk is presented as a threat for the individual, his/her family or when it is considered more generally (Sjoberg 1999). Indeed, the perception of risk is higher when it is considered as threatening the individual or his/her close relations. Without specifying who is exposed, it seems that the interviewees answers are relatively similar to their answers about the risk considered generally. 

Besides, many psychometric studies are based on risks comparisons, the relevance of which can be questioned. Indeed, we can ask ourselves if it makes sense to compare the use of amiciowave oven and the threat of a nuclear war. Often, the studied risks are too different -either in magnitude, or in nature - to be compared. It would probably be more appropriate to compare technologies that correspond to the same need, such as energy technologies or transport technologies. In this perspective, some later works seem to be more relevant, as they focus on one particular type of risk, such as the perception of risk from automobile defects or from prescription drugs (Slovic 1987, 1989). This approach should be systematized. 

These criticisms should not lead us to ignore the value of psychometric studies and in particular the... 

However, psychometric studies can still benefit from the improvement of questionnaires that could be more exhaustive and more open. 

Fischhoff, B. et al. (1977) . .How Safe is Safe Enough A Psychometric Study of Attitudes Towards Technological Risks and Benefits" School of Engineering and Applied Science, University of California, Los Angeles, Report UCLA-ENG-7717, January 1977... 

Yamaguchi, S. and A. Kimizuka, Psychometric studies on the taste of monosodium glutamate, in Glutamic Acid Advances in Biochemistry and Physiology, L.J. Filer, Ed., Raven Press, New York, 1979, p. 35. 

---