Abstract
This paper critically reviews a number of cross-national studies of perceptions of risks which have been conducted in accordance with the 'psychometric paradigm' developed by the Oregon research group in the 1970s. It considers attempts to study risk perception comparatively, from other theoretical and methodological perspectives, and discusses various issues that are highlighted in a comparative framework, relating to distinctions between 'objective' and 'perceived' risk, the role of communication and the media, the political system and various societal determinants such as marginality, gender and ethnicity. One of the main conclusions is that comparative studies of risk perception need to be further refined, both methodologically and theoretically.

This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit: