Search

A public opinion survey of three California cities assessed the extent of public concern over risks associated with modern technologies. A substantial majority of respondents were concerned with each of ten areas, with concern being more widespread among women and less widespread among the more educated. Respondents relied heavily on television news and newspapers for information and varied in rating the reliability of different information sources, with university scientists being the most highly regarded. Decisions on public safety regarding these risks were influenced mainly by federal and state officials, the news media, and business. People believed that they were largely ignored in the process. Despite this feeling, political participation rates were not associated with the extent of concern over the dangers of technological risk. Low participation and high regard for authority raise the issue of the role of the expert in society.

The adoption/nonadoption of technical innovations was examined in the Pacific Coast trawl fishery using a model based on recent conceptual issues raised in the innovation diffusion literature. Included in the model were variables measuring each fisherman's personal characteristics and situation, attitudes about fishing, and perceptions of each innovation's characteristics. Data were collected in 83 personal interviews during spring 1984, a period of economic crisis in the fleet. The results indicate that a different subset of independent variables explained the adoption of each innovation. This appears to be due to the innovation-by-innovation differences in the match between the potential adopter and the innovation. The effect of variables on adoption/nonadoption varied across innovations. The characteristics of potential adopters and the characteristics of the innovations, as perceived by the potential adopters, were both important determinants of adoption/nonadoption.

The relative efficiency was determined of detection of changes in duration of moderately intense auditory, cutaneous, mixed auditory and cutaneous, and simultaneous auditory and cutaneous stimuli. Detection of differences in cutaneous stimuli were appreciably less efficient than detection of differences in auditory stimuli. Detection of simultaneous auditory-cutaneous signals was similar to that for auditory signals alone. Detection of auditory and cutaneous signals in the mixed conditions was similar to detection of such signals presented separately. There was some evidence for adaptation or habituation to cutaneous stimulation. When detection of differences in stimuli is employed as a basis for responding, the auditory modality should be employed rather than the cutaneous modality when possible. The generality of this finding should be explored by experiments involving other discriminations, different presentation rates of relevant and irrelevant signals, and different task durations.

Vigilance for infrequent auditory or electrical cutaneous stimuli at both weak and moderate intensities was investigated. Detection probability was very high for moderate intensity signals and weak auditory stimuli. Errors significantly increased with time on task for faint cutaneous signals. Increase of the intersignal interval significantly increased the number of errors. An explanation of the results is suggested in terms of greater habituation for weak or relatively infrequent signals.

In our frenzy to revamp the schools so that we can keep pace with Russia, is there not a real danger that we lose much of the progress made in fostering over-all development of the child? We must not lose sight of the “how” of learning when we are re-thinking the “what” of learning. The child not only brings his family problems, his fatigue, his peer problems, his concerns about his development but also his need for work … for rest … for play.

In 1980 an event, heightened by its occurrence in California, which produces a quarter of the food grown in the United States, became an incident of international interest. The Mediterranean fruit fly, a dangerous agricultural pest, infested the densely-populated Santa Clara Valley. The State of California responded by spraying pesticides from aircraft over residential neighborhoods, resulting in a successful, but lengthy, multi-million dollar eradication program. Medfly’s estimated damage exceeded millions of dollars to the agricultural industry and demanded use of pesticides, a technology perennially under public and scientific scrutiny. Aerial spraying in urban areas increased the likelihood that sensitive non-target organisms, namely the Valley’s human inhabitants would be exposed to the chemicals. This provided us with the opportunity to assess perception of risk at the time residents were undergoing aerial spraying. Since that time we have seized the opportunity to obtain citizens’ views of eradication programs for other voracious pest, using a variety of pesticides and application methods. This paper discusses results of the study examining attitudes of the general public and an “elite” sample of technical experts and decision-makers. The major questions addressed herein are: Do the public, technicians, decision-makers and scientists fundamentally disagree on the issue of risks, specifically those attributable to pesticides? Is there agreement among the elite respondents? Where do the major disparities and congruities of attitudes lie?

Six Air Force Academy cadets were confined for 15 days in a simulated advanced-system crew compartment while following a schedule of 4-hours on duty and 2-hours off, and two 5-man crews of USAF pilots were confined for 30 days while alternating shifts on a schedule of 4-hours on duty and 4-hours off. While on duty the opera tors were tested with a battery of 6 performance tasks, 2 of which required interactions among crewmembers in the form of exchanges of information, cooperation, and temporal coordination. In addition, the data of the present studies were compared with those of two previous 15-day tests of two crews who worked the 4-2 schedule while being tested with a battery of 5 individual performance tasks. The data suggest that with proper control of selection and motivational fac tors, crews can work effectively for periods of at least 2 weeks and probably longer using a schedule of 4-hours on duty and 2-hours off. Crews can work even more effectively for periods of at least a month and quite probably for 2 or 3 months using a schedule of 4-hours on duty and 4-hours off, and with this schedule less demand ing controls of selection and motivational fac tors are required.

The Mediterranean Fruit Fly eradication program provided an opportunity to assess public attitudes toward technological risks. This is a case study of 126 residents from a metropolitan area who, during the 1981-82 Mediterranean Fruitfly Crisis, were undergoing exposure to aerial spraying with a pesticide. While only one-third of the subjects expressed fear of danger to their health and to the environment, 94 percent undertook one or more major behavioral precautions. Individual differences in risk perception were related to perceived benefits of the program, political ideology, faith in experts, and media exposure. Individual differences in risk acceptability varied primarily as a function of risk perception. Federal, state, and business agencies were perceived as influential in decision making, with individual citizens having little opportunity for input. Glenn R. Hawkes and Marc Pilisuk are Professors in the Department of Applied Behavioral Sciences, University of California, Davis. Martha C. Stiles is a staff researcher and Curt Acredolo is a research psychologist in the same department. The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of Gregg Nerase and Guy Whitlow. Funding was supplied in part by a grant from the California Department of Food and Agriculture (#1786) and the California Agricultural Experiment Station. A copy of the questionnaire may be obtained from the Department of Applied Behavioral Sciences, UC Davis. Public Opinion Quarterly Vol. 48:443-451 ? 1984 by the Trustees of Columbia University Published by Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc. 0033-362X/84/0048-443/$2.50 This content downloaded from 157.55.39.161 on Mon, 23 May 2016 05:41:17 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 444 GLENN R. HAWKES, ET AL. eradication and was exacerbated by the extensive media coverage of disagreements between public officials in local, state, and federal governments, agricultural business groups, scientific experts, and environmental groups.1 Opinions diverged over the fact that spraying of such duration had never been tried in populous urban centers and long-term effects had not yet been adequately studied. In addition, stripping fruit trees, quarantining, and releasing sterile flies had been largely ineffective and publicly criticized. Given the magnitude of such coverage, the eradication program was as much a political-media issue as it was a human health and environmental one. Using both attitude assessments (Fishbein, 1967) and behavioral measures, we seized the opportunity to study persons exposed to a technological event of unknown risk which was generating considerable debate and media attention. Risk Perception and Acceptability It is known that risk perception varies as a function of sex, age, and education. Women express greater risk avoidance than men (e.g., Otway, et al., 1975); and the youthful population voices greater concern (Meltsner, 1978; Van Liere and Dunlap, 1980), as do those with greater formal education (Morgan, 1967; Salcedo, 1971). Beyond these demographic differences, however, it appears that degree of confrontation and hazard-specific experience are negatively related to risk perception (e.g., Golant and Burton, 1969). Maderthaner, et al. (1976, 1978) view this as a case of "cognitive dissonance" (Festinger, 1957). "It is easier for people to change their beliefs and attitudes about living in a potential risk situation than to change their residence" (Maderthaner, et al., 1976, 1978). Meltsner (1978), however, proposes that increased exposure to or experience with a specific dangerous condition serves to reinforce indifference toward that condition, unless serious personal damage is incurred. Acceptability of risk does not necessarily covary directly with the degree of risk perceived. Perceived benefit may make even high risks acceptable (Vlek and Stallen, 1980). The work of Otway, et al., (1978) on nuclear power supports this hypothesis. They found that positive attitude could be attributed mainly to the perception of significant "economic and technological benefits." Negative attitudes, on the other hand, could be attributed to the perception of significant risk, particularly psychological risk. 1 Two former governors of California had much political stake in the outcome. They positioned themselves at polar ends, and the drama of the controversy between President Reagan and Governor Brown made this a media event of international proportions. This content downloaded from 157.55.39.161 on Mon, 23 May 2016 05:41:17 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms ASSESSING RISK: MEDFLY ERADICATION PROGRAM 445 Lowrance (1976) suggests, in addition, that voluntariness of exposure influences acceptance: "We are loath to let others do unto us what we happily do to ourselves." This tendency was also revealed in the study of perceived risks of nuclear power facilities (Otway and Fishbein, 1977). These facilities were viewed as hazardous largely because risk exposure was involuntary, and Swaton (1976) reports that most people see themselves as having minimal personal influence over technological risk situations.

Various kinds of institutional child socialization facilities have risen over the past decade in response to the demand for multiple options by women and other social circumstances. Tasks that were formerly assumed by the extended family are gradually being supplanted by bureaucracies due to changes in the extended family and greater emphasis upon the more mobile nuclear family. This paper examines Eugene Litwak's theory of shared function which attempts to establish a cooperative relationship between families and those bureaucracies created to help, and, in some cases, supplant the family in tasks traditionally tied to the family alone, such as socialization.

Detections, false responses, and response latencies were measured for subjects monitoring auditory signals (more‐intense noise pulses in a periodic‐noise pulse train) over a 1‐h period following administration of a stimulating drug (D‐amphetamine), an antiadrenergic tranquilizer (chlorpromazine), an anticholinergic tranquilizer (benactyzine), and a placebo. It was tentatively concluded that changes in performance over time following administration of the placebo could be explained in terms of shifts in subjects' criteria for responding and that, following administration of the tranquilizer, shifts both in effective sensitivity and response criteria were occurring. Following injection of D‐amphetamine, performance remained relatively constant throughout the monitoring period.