Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T01:43:30.761Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beyond Regions and Ideology: Using Cultural Theory to Explain Risk Perception in Canada

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2020

Simon J. Kiss Open the ORCID record for Simon J. Kiss [Opens in a new window] ,
Éric Montpetit Open the ORCID record for Éric Montpetit [Opens in a new window]  and
Erick Lachapelle Open the ORCID record for Erick Lachapelle [Opens in a new window]
Simon J. Kiss*
Affiliation:
Digital Media and Journalism, Wilfrid Laurier University, 20 Charlotte Street, Brantford, ON, N3T2W2
Éric Montpetit
Affiliation:
Political Science, Université de Montréal, Pavillon Lionel-Groulx, C.P. 6128 succursale Centre-ville, Montréal, QC, H3C 3J7
Erick Lachapelle
Affiliation:
Political Science, Université de Montréal, Pavillon Lionel-Groulx, C.P. 6128 succursale Centre-ville, Montréal, QC, H3C 3J7
*
*Corresponding author. Email: skiss@wlu.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cultural theory (CT) has been widely used to explain variations in risk perception but has rarely been tested in Canada. This contribution represents the most thorough attempt to adapt CT to the Canadian context. Study results suggest that respondents’ commitment to egalitarianism was strongly correlated with risks from technology, while respondents’ commitment to hierarchism was strongly correlated with risks from criminal or unsafe behaviours. Respondents’ commitment to individualism was also correlated with risks from criminal and unsafe behaviours but differed from hierarchism in that individualism was not correlated with risk perceptions from prostitution and marijuana use. Respondents’ commitments to fatalism were strongly correlated with risk perception of vaccines. These conclusions are reinforced by results from a survey question that tests the extent to which such cultural predispositions map onto the myths of nature hypothesized by CT and by a survey experiment that tests how cultural commitments predict perceived risks from a controversial pipeline.

Résumé

Résumé

La théorie culturelle (TC) a été largement utilisée pour expliquer les variations de la perception du risque mais a rarement été testée au Canada. La présente contribution représente la tentative la plus approfondie d'adaptation de la théorie culturelle au contexte canadien. Les résultats suggèrent que l'engagement des répondants envers l'égalitarisme est fortement corrélé avec les risques liés à la technologie, tandis que l'engagement des répondants envers la hiérarchie est fortement corrélé avec les risques liés à des comportements criminels ou dangereux. L'engagement des répondants envers l'individualisme était également corrélé avec les risques liés aux comportements criminels et dangereux, mais différait du hiérarchisme en ce que l'individualisme n'était pas corrélé avec les perceptions de risques liés à la prostitution et à la consommation de marijuana. L'engagement des répondants envers le fatalisme était fortement corrélé avec la perception des risques liés aux vaccins. Ces conclusions sont renforcées par les résultats d'une question d'enquête qui apprécie dans quelle mesure ces prédispositions culturelles correspondent aux mythes de la nature supposés par la théorie culturelle, et par une expérience d'enquête qui teste comment les engagements culturels prédisent les risques perçus à partir d'un pipeline controversé.

Keywords

political culturerisk perceptionenvironmental politicspublic opinioncultural theoryculture politiqueperception du risquepolitique environnementaleopinion publiquethéorie culturelle
Type
Research Article/Étude originale
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 53 , Issue 2: Special Section: COVID-19 Short Research Papers , June 2020 , pp. 439 - 460
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Replication materials for this paper can be found at https://doi.org/10.5683/SP2/DWBACD

References

Adams, Gary. 2003. Fire and Ice: The United States, Canada and the Myth of Converging Values. Toronto: Penguin.Google Scholar
Andersen, Robert and Heath, Anthony. 2003. “Social Identities and Political Cleavages: The Role of Political Context.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 166 (3): 301–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baer, Douglas and Curtis, James. 1984. “French Canadian–English Canadian Differences in Values: National Survey Findings.” Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers canadiens de sociologie 9 (4): 405–27.Google Scholar
Bauer, Paul C., Barberá, Pablo, Ackermann, Kathrin and Venetz, Aaron. 2017. “Is the Left-Right Scale a Valid Measure of Ideology? Individual-Level Variation in Associations with ‘Left’ and ‘Right’ and Left-Right Self-Placement.” Political Behavior 39 (3): 553–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Edward, Schermer, Julie Aitken and Vernon, Philip A.. 2009. “The Origins of Political Attitudes and Behaviours: An Analysis Using Twins.” Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique 42 (4): 855–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodie, M. Janine. 1990. The Political Economy of Canadian Regionalism. Toronto: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Canada.Google Scholar
Carrière, Erin and Scruggs, Lyle. 2001. “A Cross-National Study of the Cultural Sources of Environmental Attitudes: Evidence From the 2000 ISSP.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Carroll, William K. and Little, William. 2001. “Neoliberal Transformation and Antiglobalization Politics in Canada: Transition, Consolidation, Resistance.” International Journal of Political Economy 31 (3): 33–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, William K. and Shaw, Murray. 2001. “Consolidating a Neoliberal Policy Bloc in Canada, 1976 to 1996.” Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de politiques 27 (2): 195–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Harold D. 1984. Absent Mandate: The Politics of Discontent in Canada. Toronto: Gage Educational Publishing.Google Scholar
Cochrane, Christopher. 2015. Left and Right: The Small World of Political Ideas. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, Craig and Curtis, James. 1979. “English Canadian-American Differences in Value Orientations: Survey Comparisons Bearing on Lipset's Thesis.” Studies in Comparative International Development 14 (3–4): 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dake, Karl. 1991. “Orienting Dispositions in the Perception of Risk an Analysis of Contemporary Worldviews and Cultural Biases.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 22 (1): 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dake, Karl. 1992. “Myths of Nature: Culture and the Social Construction of Risk.” Journal of Social Issues 48 (4): 21–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Mary and Wildavsky, Aaron. 1983. Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technical and Environmental Dangers. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Dragojlovic, Nick and Einsiedel, Edna. 2014. “The Polarization of Public Opinion on Biofuels in North America: Key Drivers and Future Trends.” Biofuels 5 (3): 233–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabb, Edward and Curtis, James. 1988. “English Canadian-American Differences in Orientation Toward Social Control and Individual Rights.” Sociological Focus 21 (2): 127–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbing, John R., Smith, Kevin B. and Alford, John R.. 2013. Predisposed: Liberals, Conservatives, and the Biology of Political Differences. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Michael D. 2011. “Leading the Way to Compromise? Cultural Theory and Climate Change Opinion.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44 (4): 720–25.Google Scholar
Kahan, Dan M. 2012. “Watching (Resisting) Pollution of the Science Communication Environment in Real Time: Genetically Modified Foods in the US, Part 1.” Culturalcognition.net. October 12. http://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2012/10/12/watching-resisting-pollution-of-the-science-communication-en.html (March 13, 2020).Google Scholar
Kahan, Dan M., Braman, Donald, Cohen, Geoffrey L., Gastil, John and Slovic, Paul. 2010. “Who Fears the HPV Vaccine, Who Doesn't, and Why? An Experimental Study of the Mechanisms of Cultural Cognition.” Law and Human Behaviour 34 (6): 501–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kahan, Dan M., Braman, Donald, Slovic, Paul and Gastil, John. 2009. “Cultural Cognition of the Risks and Benefits of Nanotechnology.” Nature Nanotechnology 4 (2): 87–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kahan, Dan M., Jenkins-Smith, Hank and Braman, Donald. 2011. “Cultural Cognition of Scientific Consensus.” Journal of Risk Research 14 (2): 147–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krewski, Daniel, Slovic, Paul, Bartlett, Sheryl and Flynn, James. 1995. “Health Risk Perception in Canada II: Worldviews, Attitudes and Opinions.” Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 1 (3): 231–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lachapelle, Erick, Montpetit, Éric and Gauvin, Jean Philippe. 2014. “Public Perceptions of Expert Credibility on Policy Issues: The Role of Expert Framing and Political Worldviews.” Policy Studies Journal 42 (4): 674–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamonde, Yvan. 2000. Histoire sociale des idées au Québec: 1896–1929. Montreal: Fides.Google Scholar
Larson, Heidi J., Jarrett, Caitlin, Eckersberger, Elisabeth, Smith, David M. D. and Paterson, Pauline. 2014. “Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy around Vaccines and Vaccination from a Global Perspective: A Systematic Review of Published Literature, 2007–2012.” Vaccine 32 (19): 2150–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lijphart, Arend. 1979. “Religious vs. Linguistic vs. Class Voting: The ‘Crucial Experiment’ of Comparing Belgium, Canada, South Africa, and Switzerland.” American Political Science Review 73 (2): 442–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1964. “Canada and the United States—a Comparative View.” Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie 1 (4): 173–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1986. “Historical Traditions and National Characteristics: A Comparative Analysis of Canada and the United States.” Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers canadiens de sociologie 11 (2): 113–55.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1990. Continental Divide: The Values and Institutions of the United States and Canada. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
McBride, Stephen. 2005. Paradigm Shift. Halifax: Fernwood.Google Scholar
McRoberts, Kenneth and Posgate, Dale. 1983. Développement et modernisation du Québec. Montreal: Boréal Express.Google Scholar
Mnookin, Seth. 2012. The Panic Virus. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Montpetit, Éric, Lachapelle, Erick, and Kiss, Simon. 2017. Does Canadian Federalism Amplify Policy Disagreements? Montréal: Institute for Research in Public Policy. http://irpp.org/research-studies/study-no65/ (April 10, 2020).Google Scholar
Noël, Alain, Thérien, Jean-Philippe and Dallaire, Sébastien. 2004. “Divided over Internationalism: The Canadian Public and Development Assistance.” Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de politiques 30 (1): 29–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oltedal, Sigve and Rundmo, Torbjørn. 2007. “Using Cluster Analysis to Test the Cultural Theory of Risk Perception.” Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 10 (3): 254–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrella, Andrea M. L. and Kiss, Simon J.. 2015. “Risk Perception, Psychological Heuristics and the Water Fluoridation Controversy.” Canadian Journal of Public Health 106 (4): 197–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raboy, Marc. 1990. Missed Opportunities. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Richards, John and Pratt, Lawrence. 1979. Prairie Capitalism. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.Google Scholar
Ripberger, Joseph T., Gupta, Kuhika, Silva, Carol L. and Jenkins-Smith, Hank C.. 2014. “Cultural Theory and the Measurement of Deep Core Beliefs within the Advocacy Coalition Framework.” Policy Studies Journal 42 (4): 509–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ripberger, Joseph T., Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. and Herron, Kerry G.. 2011. “How Cultural Orientations Create Shifting National Security Coalitions on Nuclear Weapons and Terrorist Threats in the American Public.” PS: Political Science & Politics 44 (4): 716–19.Google Scholar
Song, Geoboo. 2014. “Understanding Public Perceptions of Benefits and Risks of Childhood Vaccinations in the United States.” Risk Analysis 34 (3): 541–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Song, Geoboo, Silva, Carol L. and Jenkins-Smith, Hank C.. 2014. “Cultural Worldview and Preference for Childhood Vaccination Policy.” Policy Studies Journal 42 (4): 528–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1991. The Malaise of Modernity. Toronto: House of Anansi.Google Scholar
Thompson, Clive. 2004. “The Anti-Vaccination Movement.” This Magazine, May–June. https://this.org/2009/10/28/science-irrationality/ (March 13, 2020).Google Scholar
Thompson, Michael, Ellis, Richard J. and Wildavsky, Aaron B.. 1990. Cultural Theory. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Wildavsky, Aaron. 1987. “Choosing Preferences by Constructing Institutions: A Cultural Theory of Preference Formation.” American Political Science Review 81 (1): 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wildavsky, Aaron. 2006. “Change in Political Culture.” In Cultural Analysis, ed. Swedlow, Brendon. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Wildavsky, Aaron and Dake, Karl. 1990. “Theories of Risk Perception: Who Fears What and Why?” Daedalus 119 (4): 41–60.Google Scholar
Wiseman, Nelson. 1981. “The Pattern of Prairie Politics.” Queen's Quarterly 88 (2): 298.Google Scholar
Wiseman, Nelson. 2007. In Search of Canadian Political Culture. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Kiss et al. supplementary material

Kiss et al. supplementary material

Download Kiss et al. supplementary material(File)
File 14.4 KB