Citation

Orr L. Risk Anal. 1982; 2(4): 239-242.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1982, Society for Risk Analysis, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1539-6924.1982.tb01387.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Prof. Wilde tells us that the effect of a non-motivational change in the safety environment on the expected accident rate is nil. I suppose that the cautious thing to do is to note that this result is a hypothesis wrapped in an interesting, and perhaps plausible model of behavioral dynamics. We should call for additional empirical and theoretical work, but the major purpose of my comment is to suggest directions for X tracting additional insight from existing literature. An interesting revelation from Wilde's own perusal of the literature is that some of the most recent research was performed without explicit guidance from a risk compensation hypothesis. Risk compensation concepts appear to have developed along independent but parallel paths in at least three social disciplines. The work in psychology, sociology, and economics is faithful to the usual modes of thought in each of these areas, yet what is common among these approaches is much more important than their differences. Prof. Wilde makes statements about underlying variables that determine the risk target at an individual level. This is where his work as a psychologist is most closely linked to that of other disciplines; however, his emphasis on the behavioral dynamics at the individual level -- the perception, decision, and controlled skilled used by the individual in adapting to a target level of risk. This behavior dynamic is been aggregated over individuals and time to obtain a model relating risk targets to accident rates....

Language: en