The distinction between ignorance about a parameter and knowing only a probability distribution for that parameter is of fundamental importance in risk assessment. Brief dialogs between a hypothetical decisionmaker and a risk assessor illustrate this point, showing that the distinction has real consequences. These dialogs are followed by a short exposition that places risk analysis in a decision‐theoretic framework, describes the important elements of that framework, and uses these to shed light on Terje Aven's criticism of nonprobabilistic purely "objective" methods. Suggestions are offered concerning a more effective approach to evaluating those methods.
", language="", issn="0272-4332", doi="10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01361.x", url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01361.x" }