King's College London

Research portal

Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies: An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies : An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas. / Schweiger, Elisa; de Groot, Judith; Schubert, Iljana.

In: Risk Analysis, Vol. 40, No. 6, 19.06.2020, p. 1226-1243.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Schweiger, E, de Groot, J & Schubert, I 2020, 'Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies: An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas', Risk Analysis, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1226-1243. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13457

APA

Schweiger, E., de Groot, J., & Schubert, I. (2020). Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies: An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas. Risk Analysis, 40(6), 1226-1243. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13457

Vancouver

Schweiger E, de Groot J, Schubert I. Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies: An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas. Risk Analysis. 2020 Jun 19;40(6):1226-1243. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13457

Author

Schweiger, Elisa ; de Groot, Judith ; Schubert, Iljana. / Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies : An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas. In: Risk Analysis. 2020 ; Vol. 40, No. 6. pp. 1226-1243.

Bibtex Download

@article{77f75bfd9c74430e8326e2373453bb7b,
title = "Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies: An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas",
abstract = "Risky energy technologies are often controversial and debates around them are polarized; in such debates public acceptability is key. Research on public acceptability has emphasized the importance of intrapersonal factors but has largely neglected the influence of interpersonal factors. In an online survey (N = 948) with a representative sample of the United Kingdom, we therefore integrate interpersonal factors (i.e., social influence as measured by social networks) with two risky energy technologies that differ in familiarity (nuclear power vs. shale gas) to examine how these factors explain risk and benefit perceptions and public acceptability. Findings show that benefit perceptions are key in explaining acceptability judgments. However, risk perceptions are more important when people are less familiar with the energy technology. Social network factors affect perceived risks and benefits associated with risky energy technology, hereby indirectly helping to form one's acceptability judgment toward the technology. This effect seems to be present regardless of the perceived familiarity with the energy technology. By integrating interpersonal with intrapersonal factors in an explanatory model, we show how the current “risk–benefit acceptability” model used in risk research can be further developed to advance the current understanding of acceptability formation.",
keywords = "Acceptability, energy technologies, risks perception, social influence, social networks",
author = "Elisa Schweiger and {de Groot}, Judith and Iljana Schubert",
year = "2020",
month = jun,
day = "19",
doi = "10.1111/risa.13457",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "1226--1243",
journal = "Risk Analysis",
issn = "0272-4332",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "6",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies

T2 - An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas

AU - Schweiger, Elisa

AU - de Groot, Judith

AU - Schubert, Iljana

PY - 2020/6/19

Y1 - 2020/6/19

N2 - Risky energy technologies are often controversial and debates around them are polarized; in such debates public acceptability is key. Research on public acceptability has emphasized the importance of intrapersonal factors but has largely neglected the influence of interpersonal factors. In an online survey (N = 948) with a representative sample of the United Kingdom, we therefore integrate interpersonal factors (i.e., social influence as measured by social networks) with two risky energy technologies that differ in familiarity (nuclear power vs. shale gas) to examine how these factors explain risk and benefit perceptions and public acceptability. Findings show that benefit perceptions are key in explaining acceptability judgments. However, risk perceptions are more important when people are less familiar with the energy technology. Social network factors affect perceived risks and benefits associated with risky energy technology, hereby indirectly helping to form one's acceptability judgment toward the technology. This effect seems to be present regardless of the perceived familiarity with the energy technology. By integrating interpersonal with intrapersonal factors in an explanatory model, we show how the current “risk–benefit acceptability” model used in risk research can be further developed to advance the current understanding of acceptability formation.

AB - Risky energy technologies are often controversial and debates around them are polarized; in such debates public acceptability is key. Research on public acceptability has emphasized the importance of intrapersonal factors but has largely neglected the influence of interpersonal factors. In an online survey (N = 948) with a representative sample of the United Kingdom, we therefore integrate interpersonal factors (i.e., social influence as measured by social networks) with two risky energy technologies that differ in familiarity (nuclear power vs. shale gas) to examine how these factors explain risk and benefit perceptions and public acceptability. Findings show that benefit perceptions are key in explaining acceptability judgments. However, risk perceptions are more important when people are less familiar with the energy technology. Social network factors affect perceived risks and benefits associated with risky energy technology, hereby indirectly helping to form one's acceptability judgment toward the technology. This effect seems to be present regardless of the perceived familiarity with the energy technology. By integrating interpersonal with intrapersonal factors in an explanatory model, we show how the current “risk–benefit acceptability” model used in risk research can be further developed to advance the current understanding of acceptability formation.

KW - Acceptability

KW - energy technologies

KW - risks perception

KW - social influence

KW - social networks

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85079461981&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/risa.13457

DO - 10.1111/risa.13457

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 1226

EP - 1243

JO - Risk Analysis

JF - Risk Analysis

SN - 0272-4332

IS - 6

ER -

View graph of relations

© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454