Elite Ideology and Risk Perception in Nuclear Energy Policy
- 1 June 1987
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in American Political Science Review
- Vol. 81 (2) , 383-404
- https://doi.org/10.2307/1961958
Abstract
Changing U.S. attitudes toward new technologies are examined, as are explanations of such changes. We hypothesize that increased concern with the risks of new technologies by certain elite groups is partly a surrogate for underlying ideological criticisms of U.S. society. The question of risk is examined within the framework of the debate over nuclear energy. Studies of various leadership groups are used to demonstrate the ideological component of risk assessment. Studies of scientists' and journalists' attitudes, media coverage of nuclear energy, and public perception of scientists' views suggest both that journalists' ideologies influence their coverage of nuclear energy and that media coverage of the issue is partly responsible for public misperceptions of the views of scientists. We conclude with a discussion of the historical development of the environmental movement in the 1960s and 1970s and the relation of this movement to the public's declining support for nuclear energy.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Ideology Authoritarianism and Mental HealthPolitical Psychology, 1984
- Scientists' attitudes towards nuclear energyNature, 1983
- Radicalism or Reformism: The Sources of Working-class PoliticsAmerican Political Science Review, 1983
- Post-Materialism in an Environment of InsecurityAmerican Political Science Review, 1981
- Richer is SaferCFA Magazine, 1981
- Newspaper Coverage of Causes of DeathJournalism Quarterly, 1979
- Rating the RisksEnvironment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 1979
- The Evolution of the Nuclear Debate: The Role of Public ParticipationAnnual Review of Energy, 1978
- The Visible ScientistsThe Sciences, 1977
- Public Affairs Television and the Growth of Political Malaise: The Case of “The Selling of the Pentagon”American Political Science Review, 1976