How should marketers communicate risk information? In discussing this question, the author begins with basic economic theory and expected utility theory. He then discusses the limitations that result from misestimation of probability, the need to deal with many risks at once, and the existence of individual differences in risk preference. He reviews the problem of cognitive biases, such as the tendency to favor harms of omission over harms of direct action, and concludes with suggestions for the design of risk communication that take into account these factors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaronJonathan (1993), Morality and Rational Choice.Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
2.
BaronJonathan (1997), “Confusion of Relative and Absolute Risk in Valuation,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14(February), 301–309.
3.
BaronJonathan (1998), Judgment Misguided: Intuition and Error in Public Decision Making.New York: Oxford University Press.
4.
BaronJonathan (2003), “De-biasing by Calculation, Elaboration, and Reduction,” working paper, Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania.
5.
BaronJonathan, and RitovIlana (1994), “Reference Points and Omission Bias,”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 59(3), 475–98.
6.
BazermanMax H., BaronJonathan, and ShonkKatherine (2001), You Can't Enlarge the Pie: Six Barriers to Effective Government.New York: Basic Books.
7.
ByrnesJames P., MillerDavid C., and SchaferWilliam D. (1999), “Gender Differences in Risk Taking: A Meta-Analysis,”Psychological Bulletin, 125(3), 367–83.
8.
JenniKaren E., and LoewensteinGeorge (1997), “Explaining the Identifiable Victim Effect,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14(February), 235–57.
9.
KahnemanDaniel, and TverskyAmos (1979), “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk,”Econometrica, 47(2), 263–91.
10.
KaplowLouis, and ShavellSteven (2002), Fairness Versus Welfare.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
KunreutherHoward, NovemskyNathan, and KahnemanDaniel (2001), “Making Low Probabilities Useful,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 23(2), 103–120.
12.
KuranTimur, and SunsteinCass R. (1999), “Availability Cascades and Risk Regulation,”Stanford Law Review, 51(April), 683–768.
McClellandGary H., SchulzeWilliam D., and CourseyDon L. (1993), “Insurance for Low-Probability Hazards: A Bimodal Response to Unlikely Events,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 7(1), 95–116.
15.
MeszarosJacqueline R., AschDavid A., BaronJonathan, HersheyJohn C., KunreutherHoward, and Schwartz-BuzagloJoanne (1996), “Cognitive Processes and the Decisions of Some Parents to Forego Pertussis Vaccination for Their Children,”Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49, 697–703.
RitovIlana, and BaronJonathan (1990), “Reluctance to Vaccinate: Omission Bias and Ambiguity,”Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 263–77.
18.
RoyzmanEdward B., and BaronJonathan (2002), “The Preference for Indirect Harm,”Social Justice Research, 15(2), 165–84.
19.
SprancaMark, MinskElisa, and BaronJonathan (1991), “Omission and Commission in Judgment and Choice,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 76–105.
20.
SunsteinCass R., and ThalerRichard H. (2003), “Libertarian Paternalism,”American Economic Review, 93(2), 175–79.
21.
ViscusiW. Kip, CarvalhoIrineu E., AntoñanzasFernando, RoviraJoan, BrañaFrancisco J., and PortilloFabiola (2000), “Smoking Risks in Spain: Part III—Determinants of Smoking Behavior,” Discussion Paper No. 306, John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics, and Business, Harvard Law School, (accessed January 28, 2003), [available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=256012].
