Subjective evaluation and perception of risk by various population groups

View or download the full article: 
614.7: 616-092.11

T.N. Unguryanu


Arkhangelsk Region Department of the Federal Service on Customers' Rights Protection and Human Well-Being Surveillance, Russian Federation, Arkhangelsk, 24 Gaydara st., 163061


In order to study the characteristics of health risk perception, a total of 695 individuals aged 18 or over from the town of Novodvinsk were interviewed. It was determined that respondents under the age of 30 tend to exaggerate the danger of chemical environmental pollution in comparison to 45-year-old individuals. It is typical of individuals with higher education and employees to consider lifestyle factors to be a high health risk in comparison with less educated respondents and workers. Respondents with specialized post-secondary education and
manual workers consider radioactive environmental pollution to be a high health risk. Individuals with average or low incomes consider low quality of life as of higher risk when compared with those with higher income.

health risk perception
Unguryanu T.N. Subjective evaluation and perception of risk by various population groups. Health Risk Analysis, 2013, no. 3, pp. 82-87
  1. Novikov S.M., Abalkina I.L., Skovronskaja S.A. Analiz vosprijatija riska zdorov'ju i gotovnost' platit' za ego snizhenie [The analysis of the perception of a health risk and willingness to pay for its reduction]. Gigiena i sanitarija, 2005, no. 6, pp. 9–13.
  2. Skovronskaja S.A., Novikov S.M., Shishhenko A.A., Solonin S.A. Osobennosti vosprijatija zdorov'ju razlichnymi gruppami na primere zhitelej Sajanogorska [The characteristics of health risk perception by various groups – a case study of the population of the town of Sayanogorsk]. Gigiena i sanitarija, 2006, no. 5, pp. 72–74.
  3. Skovronskaja S.A. Vosprijatie riska i harakteristika ushherba kak osnovnye jelementy analiza riska [The perception of risk and the characterization of damage as the main risk analysis elements: summary of the thesis of PhD in Medicine]. Moscow, 2006, 24 p.
  4. Aakko E. Risk сommuniсation, risk perсeption and publiс health. WMJ, 2004, vol. 103, no. 1,
    pp. 25–27.
  5. Luria P., Perkins С., Lyons М. Health risk perсeption and environmental problems: findings from ten сase studies in the North west of England. Liverpool, 2009, 70 p.
  6. Sloviс P. Perсeption of risk. Sсienсe, 1987, vol. 236, pp. 80–85.
  7. Starr С., Whipple С.A Perspeсtive on Health and Safety Risk Analysis. Management Sсienсe, 1984, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 452–463.
  8. Starr С., Whipple С. Risks of Risk Deсisions. Sсienсe, 1980, vol. 208, no. 4448, pp. 1114–1119.
  9. Starr С. Soсial Benefit versus Teсhnologiсal Risk. Sсienсe, 1969, vol. 165, pp. 1232–1238.
  10. Understanding Risk. Informing Deсisions in a Demoсratiс Soсiety. – Washington, DС: National Aсad-emy Press. NRС, 1996.

You are here