抄録
This article aimed to examine psychological fairness in risk communication. We hypothesized that people are motivated to assess the procedural fairness of risk managers through risk messages from them. Thus, the first aim of the study was to reveal the psychological fairness criteria used by people when they read the risk messages regarding a nuclear power plant and an artificial food additive. Using the data on a sample of 408 citizens, SEM (structural equation modeling) revealed two criteria of a fair message: truthfulness and consideration. The truthfulness criterion consists of three elements: accuracy, informational openness, and suppression of concealment. The consideration criterion also consists of three elements: using plain words, respect for people, and voice. The second aim of the study was to examine the structure and efficiency of these criteria in comparing two risk communication settings: social debate and personal choice. The results revealed the same structure and efficiency, so that truthfulness and consideration are commonly used criteria beyond the settings. The results of this study suggested that presenting a fair message with truthfulness and consideration could determine future interactions among people in risk communication.
This article aimed to examine psychological fairness in risk communication. We hypothesized that people are motivated to assess the procedural fairness of risk managers through risk messages from them. Thus, the first aim of the study was to reveal the psychological fairness criteria used by people when they read the risk messages regarding a nuclear power plant and an artificial food additive. Using the data on a sample of 408 citizens, SEM (structural equation modeling) revealed two criteria of a fair message: truthfulness and consideration. The truthfulness criterion consists of three elements: accuracy, informational openness, and suppression of concealment. The consideration criterion also consists of three elements: using plain words, respect for people, and voice. The second aim of the study was to examine the structure and efficiency of these criteria in comparing two risk communication settings: social debate and personal choice. The results revealed the same structure and efficiency, so that truthfulness and consideration are commonly used criteria beyond the settings. The results of this study suggested that presenting a fair message with truthfulness and consideration could determine future interactions among people in risk communication.
