Abstract
A large proportion of people the world over do nothing or very little to adjust to seismic hazards. Antecedents of seismic adjustment adoption rates relate to fundamental motivations to understand, to belong, to enhance a sense of self-worth, to trust and to control. These motivations are accommodated within socioeconomic and cultural constraints. Understanding such motivations and constraints forms a step in understanding how to facilitate mitigative actions. Through consideration of these issues, the characteristics that define groups less likely to adopt mitigative measures against earthquake hazards are tentatively identified. A UCL-based study that looks to enhance the state-of-the-art knowledge on socio-psychological factors affecting seismic adjustment rates is described. It explores the barriers to seismic adjustment in individuals and small groups in three different countries, and this paper presents some of its initial findings.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adams J (1995) Risk. UCL Press, London
Armas I, Avram E (2008) Patterns and trends in the perception of seismic risk. Case study: Bucharest Municipality/Romania. Nat Hazards 44(1):147Ê¿161
Asgary A, Willis KG (1997) Household behavior in response to earthquake risk: an assessment of alternative theories. Disasters 21(4):354Ê¿365
Dooley D, Catalano R, Mishra S, Serxner S (1992) Earthquake preparedness: predictors in a community survey. J Appl Soc Psychol 22:451Ê¿470
Duval TS, Mulilis J-P (1999) A Person-relative-to-Event (PrE) approach to negative threat appeals and earthquake preparedness: A field study. J Appl Soc Psychol 29(3):495Ê¿516
Escaleras M, Anbarci E, Register CA (2007) Public sector corruption and natural disasters: a potentially deadly interaction. Publ Choice 132(1Ê¿2):209Ê¿230
Farley JE (1998) Earthquake fears, predictions, and preparations in mid-America. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, IL
Flynn J, Slovic P, Mertz CK, Carlisle C (1999) Public support for earthquake risk mitigation in Portland, Oregon. Risk Anal 19(2):205Ê¿216
Green R (2008) Unauthorised development and seismic hazard vulnerability: a study of squatters and engineers in Istanbul, Turkey. Disasters 32(3):358Ê¿376
Heller K, Alexander DB, Gatz M, Knight BG, Rose T (2005) Social and personal factors as predictors of earthquake preparation: the role of support provision, network discussion, negative effect, age and education. J Appl Soc Psychol 35(2):399Ê¿422
Joffe H (1999) Risk and ʿthe otherʿ. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Joffe H (2003) Risk: from perception to social representation. Br J Soc Psychol 42(1):55Ê¿73
Johnston DM, Karanci AN, Arikan M, Hopkins DC (2003) Residential retrofitting in Istanbul, Turkey: social and economic considerations. Paper presented at the 8th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, CA
Karanci NA, Aksit B (1999) Strengthening community participation in disaster management by strengthening governmental and non-governmental organisations and networks: a case study from Dinar and Bursa (Turkey). Aust J Emerg Manag 12(4):35Ê¿39
Keltner D, Gruenfeld DH, Anderson C (2003) Power, approach and inhibition. Psychol Rev 110(2):265Ê¿284
Kirschenbaum A (2005) Preparing for the inevitable: environmental risk perceptions and disaster preparedness. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 23(2):97Ê¿127
Lai JC, Tao J (2003) Perception of environmental hazard in Hong Kong Chinese. Risk Anal 23(4):669Ê¿684
Lindell MK, Perry RW (2000) Household adjustment to earthquake hazard: a review of the research. Environ Behav 32(4):461Ê¿501
Lindell MK, Prater CS (2000) Household adoption of seismic adjustments: a comparison of research in two states. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 18(2):317Ê¿338
Lindell MK, Prater CS (2002) Risk area residentsʿ perceptions and adoptions of seismic hazard adjustments. J Appl Soc Psychol 32(11):2377ʿ2392
Lindell MK, Whitney DJ (2000) Correlates of household seismic adjustment adoption. Risk Anal 20(1):13Ê¿25
McClure J, Walkey FH, Allen M (1999) When earthquake damage is seen as preventable: attributions, locus of control and attitudes to risk. Appl Psychol Int Rev 48(2):239Ê¿256
McClure J, Allen M, Walkey FH (2001) Countering fatalism: causal information in news reports affects judgments about earthquake damage. Basic Appl Soc Psychol 23(2):109Ê¿121
Mileti DS, Fitzpatrick C (1992) The great earthquake experiment: risk communication and public action. Westview Press, Boulder, CO
Mulilis J-P (1995) Social considerations of disaster-resistant technology: the Person-relative-to-Event (PrE) model of coping with threat. J Urban Technol 3(3):59Ê¿70
Mulilis J-P, Lippa R (1990) Behavioral change in earthquake preparedness due to negative threat appeals: a test of protection motivation theory. J Appl Soc Psychol 20(8):619Ê¿638
Palm R (1998) Urban earthquake hazards: the impacts of culture on perceived risk and response in the USA and Japan. Appl Geogr 18(1):35Ê¿46
Palm R, Carroll J (1998) Illusions of safety: culture and earthquake hazard response in California and Japan. Westview Press, Boulder, CO
Paradise TR (2006) Perceptions of seismic risk in a Muslim city. J North Afr Stud 11(3):243Ê¿262
Paton D (2008) Risk communication and natural hazard mitigation: How trust influences its effectiveness. Int J Global Environ Issues 8(1Ê¿2):2Ê¿16
Perry RW, Lindell MK (2008) Volcanic risk perception and adjustment in a multi-hazard environment. J Volc Geoth Res 172(3Ê¿4):170Ê¿178
Rozin P, Lowery L, Imada S, Haidt J (1999) The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). J Pers Soc Psychol 76(4):574Ê¿586
RÊ¿stemli A, Karanci AN (1999) Correlates of earthquake cognitions and preparedness behavior in a victimized population. J Soc Psychol 139(1):91Ê¿101
Slovic P (2000) The perception of risk. Earthscan, London, UK
Solberg C, Joffe H, Rossetto T (2009) The social psychology of seismic hazard adjustment. Submission to Nat Hazard Earth Sys
Spittal MJ, Walkey FH, McClure JL, Siegert RJ, Ballantyne KE (2006) The earthquake readiness scale: The development of a valid and reliable unifactorial measure. Nat Hazard 39:15Ê¿29
Spittal MJ, McClure JL, Siegert RJ, Walkey FH (2008) Predictors of two types of earthquake preparation: survival activities and mitigation activities. Environ Behav (in press)
Turner R, Nigg J, Heller-Paz D (1986) Waiting for disaster. University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rossetto, T., Joffe, H., Solberg, C. (2011). A Different View on Human Vulnerability to Earthquakes: Lessons from Risk Perception Studies. In: Spence, R., So, E., Scawthorn, C. (eds) Human Casualties in Earthquakes. Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, vol 29. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9455-1_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9455-1_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-9454-4
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-9455-1
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)