Journal of the Korean Society of Safety (한국안전학회지)

The Korean Society of Safety (한국안전학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Survey on the Risk Perceptions of Employees in Nuclear Power Plants

원자력 발전소 종사자들의 리스크 인식 조사

  • Lee, Hee Hwan (Department of Safety Engineering, Graduate School of Industry, Seoul National University of Science and Technology) ;
  • Park, Dal Jae (Department of Safety Engineering, Seoul National University of Science and Technology)
  • 이희환 (서울과학기술대학교 산업대학원 안전공학과) ;
  • 박달재 (서울과학기술대학교 안전공학과)
  • Received : 2016.05.31
  • Accepted : 2017.01.26
  • Published : 2017.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study has been performed to investigate the risk perceptions of employees in nuclear power plants. A representative sample of 473 employees was surveyed(about 79% response rate). The questionnaire included scales on both risk perceptions of critical five hazards that could be occurring in the nuclear power plants and two psychometric attitudes. Higher risk perceptions between managers and non-managers to five hazards used in this study were entirely obtained from the managers. It was also found that the perceived higher hazards were in the following order: radiation exposure, radioactive release, explosion, fire and radioactive waste. For the controllability, higher risk perceptions to the all factors were obtained from the managers, and higher ones were non-managers in the dread.

Keywords

References

  1. O. Renn, "Three Decades of Risk Research: Accomplishments and New Challenges", J. of Risk Research, Vol. 1, pp. 49-71, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1080/136698798377321
  2. P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff and S. Lichtenstein, "Why Study Risk Perception?", Risk Analysis, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 83-93, 1982. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1982.tb01369.x
  3. P. Slovic, "Informing and Educating the Public about Risk", In Perception of Risk, R.E. (eds), Lofstedt, EARTHSCAN, London Sterling, pp. 183-198, 2000.
  4. P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff and S. Lichtenstein, "Facts and Fears, Understanding Perceived Risk", In Schwing RC & Albers WA Jr. (eds): Societal Risk Assessment, How Safe is Safe Enough?, New York, Plenum Press, pp. 181-216, 1980.
  5. P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff and S. Lichtenstein, "Behavioral Decision Theory Perspectives on Risk and Safety", Acta Psychologica, Vol. 56, pp. 183-203, 1984. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(84)90018-0
  6. P. Slovic and B. Fischhoff, "Perception of Risk", Science, Vol. 236, pp. 280-285, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507
  7. P. Slovic, "Social Benefit Versus Technological Risk", Science, Vol. 165, pp. 1232-1238, 1969. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.165.3899.1232
  8. P. Sandman, "Responding to Community Outrage: Strategies for Effective Risk Communication", AIHA Press., 1993.
  9. A. D. Kofi, "Public Health Risk Assessment", Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002.
  10. V. T. Covello and F. Allen, "Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication", Washington, D. C: U.S Environmental Protection Agency, Policy Document OPA-87-020, 1988.
  11. B. Y. Seo, "A Study on the Risk Communication in Digital Society", PhD Thesis, Chung-Ang Univeristy, pp. 22-31, 2006.
  12. S. R. Choi, "Risk Communication Revitalization by Analysis of Food Incidents", PhD Thesis, Chosun University, pp. 12-26, 2010.
  13. K. H. Cho, "A Study on Risk Communication for Managers and Workers of Chemical Companies", PhD Thesis, Korea University, pp. 10-21, 2013.
  14. H. M. Kwon, "A Study on the Revitalization of Risk Communication for Improving Safety Management of Natural Gas Workplace", Master Thesis, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, pp. 4-22, 2014.
  15. R. Lundgren and A. McMakin, "Risk Communication: A Handbook for Communicating Environmental, Safety, and Health Risks(3rd edition), Columbus, Ohio, Battelle Press, 2004.