Lay people’s and experts’ risk perception and acceptance of vaccination and culling strategies to fight animal epidemics
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12598200 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Alexandra Zingg (0000-0002-4369-5354, ETH Zurich, corresponding author), Michael Siegrist (0000-0002-6139-7190, ETH Zurich) |
| Year | 2011 |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 53-66 |
| Publication date | 2011-09-02 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Risk Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1366-9877 • E-ISSN: 1466-4461 |
| Publisher | Routledge (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/13669877.2011.601320 |
| OpenAlex | W2026511353 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 23 |
To fight highly infectious animal diseases, there are almost exclusively two possible strategies that can be done: vaccination and culling. For effective risk communication and management strategies during a crisis, the risk perception and beliefs of different stakeholders are essential. Risk perception and acceptance of various strategies to fight such animal epidemics are examined for the population, farmers, and veterinarians. Data were gathered from questionnaires sent out to three stakeholder groups. All stakeholders clearly preferred a vaccination strategy to a culling strategy. We found that farmers, although they were expected somehow to be experts, had response patterns more similar to the population than to the veterinarians. As expected, veterinarians perceived less risk and had higher acceptance ratings than the population. We equally found gender differences for lay people and for experts. Therefore, the explanation of differences in risk perception between experts and lay people according to knowledge could clearly be ruled out. We detected differences between men and women concerning their attitudes and moral values, which were the same for lay people and for experts
Culling · Environmental health · Perception · Political science · Population · Public relations · Risk perception · Stakeholder · Vaccination · Veterinary medicine · Medicine · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Risk Perception and Management · Social Psychology · Zoonotic diseases and public health
Synthetic livestock vaccines as risky interference with nature? Lay and expert arguments and understandings of “naturalness”
Media coverage volume and expert risk perception in risk assessment
Organising for socio-ecological resilience
Beyond toxic toxicity”
Public risk perception in the total meat supply chain
Gender and Environmental Risk Concerns
Theories of Risk Perception
Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science
Intuitive Toxicology
Public Perceptions of the Potential Hazards Associated with Food Production and Food Consumption
Gender, race, and perceived risk
Perception of Hazards
Risk Perception of the “Mad Cow Disease” in France
Risk Response to Environmental Hazards to Health – Towards an Ecological Approach
Mad Cow Disease — Painting Policy‐Making into a Corner
Experts' Views on Societal Risk Attention1
Scientist and public responses to BSE‐related risk
Public perception of a range of potential food risks in the United Kingdom
Lay people's perception of food hazards
How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits
Perceived Risk of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Dietary Behavior
Orienting Dispositions in the Perception of Risk
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,38 |
| Citation span | 2013 - 2025 (13) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |