Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Environment and Behavior
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Trettin, L.
Right arrow Articles by Musham, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Is Trust a Realistic Goal of Environmental Risk Communication?

Lillian Trettin

Medical University of South Carolina

Catherine Musham, Ph.D.

Department of Library Sciences and Informatics at the Medical University of South Carolina

Environmental risk communication often fails in its efforts to overcome prevalent public distrust of government and industrial agencies. But, is achieving trust a realistic goal? The authors begin by reexamining definitions of the terms trust and credibility and summarizing recent assessments of the role trust plays in risk communication. On the basis of research conducted among people living near major nuclear power and hazardous waste storage facilities in rural South Carolina, they address whether trust, defined as uncritical emotional acceptance, is necessary for adequate risk communication. The authors propose that strategies of risk communication should focus not on building trust but on establishing procedures and standards that the public understands and accepts.

Environment and Behavior, Vol. 32, No. 3, 410-426 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/00139160021972595
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
L. Lemyre, S. Gibson, J. Zlepnig, R. Meyer-Macleod, and P. Boutette
Emergency preparedness for higher risk populations: psychosocial considerations
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, June 1, 2009; 134(3-4): 207 - 214.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Health Promot PractHome page
G. D. Thomas, S. M. Smith, and J. A. Turcotte
Using Public Relations Strategies to Prompt Populations at Risk to Seek Health Information: The Hanford Community Health Project
Health Promot Pract, January 1, 2009; 10(1): 92 - 101.
[Abstract] [PDF]