» Articles » PMID: 9972583

Gender Differences in Risk Perception: Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives

Overview
Journal Risk Anal
Specialty Public Health
Date 1999 Feb 11
PMID 9972583
Citations 115
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A substantial body of risk research indicates that women and men differ in their perceptions of risk. This paper discusses how they differ and why. A review of a number of existing empirical studies of risk perception points at several problems, regarding what gender differences are found in such studies, and how these differences are accounted for. Firstly, quantitative approaches, which have so far dominated risk research, and qualitative approaches give different, sometimes even contradictory images of women's and men's perceptions of risk. Secondly, the gender differences that appear are often left unexplained, and even when explanations are suggested, these are seldom related to gender research and gender theory in any systematic way. This paper argues that a coherent, theoretically informed gender perspective on risk is needed to improve the understanding of women's and men's risk perceptions. An analysis of social theories of gender points out some relations and distinctions which should be considered in such a perspective. It is argued that gender structures, reflected in gendered ideology and gendered practice, give rise to systematic gender differences in the perception of risk. These gender differences may be of different kinds, and their investigation requires the use of qualitative as well as quantitative methods. In conclusion, the arguments about gender and risk perception are brought together in a theoretical model which might serve as a starting point for further research.

Citing Articles

Comparison of injective related reactions following ofatumumab and ocrelizumab in patients with multiple sclerosis: data from the European spontaneous reporting system.

Scavone C, Anatriello A, Baccari I, Cantone A, Di Giulio Cesare D, Bernardi F Front Neurol. 2024; 15:1383910.

PMID: 38994488 PMC: 11236557. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1383910.


Digitalization and job stress: exploring the mediating roles of job and personal aversion risk with gender as a moderator.

Han S Front Psychol. 2024; 15:1370711.

PMID: 38988392 PMC: 11233729. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1370711.


Pharmacovigilance Practices by Healthcare Providers in Oncology: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Alkofide H, Almalag H, Alromaih M, Alotaibi L, Altuwaijri N, Al Aloola N Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2024; 17(6).

PMID: 38931351 PMC: 11206558. DOI: 10.3390/ph17060683.


Impact of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection on college students' hesitancy to receive additional COVID-19 vaccine booster doses: A study from Taizhou, China.

Deng J, Huang C, Hu Q, Shi L, Chen X, Luo X Prev Med Rep. 2024; 41:102709.

PMID: 38576514 PMC: 10992892. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102709.


Latent profile and network analysis of risk perception among a sample of Chinese university students during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study.

Niu Z, Liu L, Mei S, Li L Front Public Health. 2024; 11:1171870.

PMID: 38249407 PMC: 10796724. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1171870.