Trust your emotions, urges research
New research from several UK institutions will present new findings on coping with uncertainty on 7 September. The presentations, part of the British Association for the Advancement of Science Festival in Norwich, UK, will examine the many different ways people deal with risk, from terrorism, to driving to nuclear power - how do people deal with risk, and perhaps more importantly for science - how can the scientific community build greater trust with the public in the face of science 'scare stories'? Professor Peter Taylor-Gooby, Director from the Economic and Social Research Council and the University of Kent says that more information could help but is not the whole answer. 'There is a lot of evidence that concern about risk is directly related to lack of knowledge and the extent to which the event is dreaded. And trust always involves emotion as well as reason.' This suggests that 'gut' instinct is a powerful driver in the assessment of risk. 'The way that information about a particular risk is transmitted and interpreted by various audiences is also important in determining how people respond,' he continues. 'Government should be certainly thinking about building trust, but it is very difficult to do. People need to feel they are being taken seriously and it would help if there was more reporting back after public consultations. Transparency is the key, particularly when mistakes have been made.' Dr Jens Zinn, also from the University of Kent, has been looking at different ways in which people perceive risk. He concludes that more and more, people are taking decisions without concrete outcomes. 'Every day we probably take some routine risks without thinking - like driving to work or taking an escalator - but we also have to take serious decisions about jobs, marriage or buying a car without enough information and certainty to make a rational choice,' he says. 'Strategies in between pure rationality and blind faith or hope become more and more important in a world with growing uncertainties.' Further research from the University of Cardiff has been looking at how media outlets convey risk to the public. They looked particularly at the debates over genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and human genetic research, concluding that media outlets typically use emotive language to describe scientific developments. This research seems to suggest that emotion and instinct are important factors in the assessment of risk, and media outlets rely on this knowledge in order to convey stories quickly and easily. The problem, of course, is that this style of reporting may mask or polarise the issue. Further research from Cardiff University examines how people living close to nuclear power stations change their perception of risk over time, as the risk becomes routine, and the balance between risk, expanse and other factors subtly shift. In a world where uncertainties and risk appear to be increasing, that gut instinct will be increasingly important.
Countries
United Kingdom