Citation

MacGregor DG, Slovic P, Malmfors T. Risk Anal. 1999; 19(4): 649-659.

Affiliation

Decision Research, Eugene, Oregon 97401, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1999, Society for Risk Analysis, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

10765428

Abstract

The concept of exposure is central to chemical risk assessment and plays an important role in communicating to the public about the potential health risks of chemicals. Research on chemical risk perception has found some indication that the model lay people use to judge chemical exposure differs from that of toxicologists, thereby leading to different conclusions about chemical safety. This paper presents the results of a series of studies directed toward developing a model for understanding how lay people interpret the concept of chemical exposure. The results indicate that people's beliefs about chemical exposure (and its risks) are based on two broad categories of inferences. One category of inferences relates to the nature in which contact with a chemical has taken place, including the amount of a chemical involved and its potential health consequences. A second category of inferences about chemical exposure relates to the pragmatics of language interpretation, leading to beliefs about the motives and purposes behind chemical risk communication. Risk communicators are encouraged to consider how alternative models of exposure and language interpretation can lead to conflicting conclusions on the part of the public about chemical safety.

Language: en