Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Editorial
. 2022 Jul;42(7):1367-1380.
doi: 10.1111/risa.13926.

The social amplification of risk framework: New perspectives

Roger E Kasperson  1 , Thomas Webler  2 , Bonnie Ram  3 , Jeannette Sutton  4
Affiliations
Editorial

The social amplification of risk framework: New perspectives

Roger E Kasperson et al. Risk Anal. 2022 Jul.

Abstract

Several decades have elapsed since the introduction in 1988 of the social amplification of risk framework (SARF) by researchers from Clark University and Decision Research. SARF was offered as an umbrella under which social, psychological, and cultural theories of risk could be integrated and thereby supplement technical risk analyses. Some critics suggest that SARF cannot be tested thus, the framework is useful, at most, as a post hoc analysis of some kinds of risks. Others counter that predictability is not required for a framework to be useful and that SARF is an effective tool in organizing data related to public perceptions, values, and behaviors. It can also be used to design more effective risk communication and public engagement strategies. SARF also suggests how to conceptually view the dynamics of social media channels, despite the fact that SARF was developed before the explosion of global digital platforms. The papers in this special issue consider developments, refinements, critiques, contributions, extensions of the approach to new risk issues, as well as the findings and hypotheses that have grown out of what is now close to three decades of empirical research. This introductory paper provides background on SARF, presents a literature review since 2003, introduces the contributions to this issue, and highlights several areas for future research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Social amplification of risk framework. Source: Kasperson and Kasperson (1996)
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Risk Amplification and stigmatization. Source: Kasperson et al. (2001)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Arvai, J. , & Rivers, L. I. I. I. (2014). Effective risk communication. Earthscan.
    1. Bearth, A. , & Siegrist, M. (2022). The social amplification of risk framework: A normative perspective on trust? Risk Analysis, 10.1111/risa.13757 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown, A. (2021). Understanding the technical and societal relationship between shadow banning and algorithmic bias. Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/anniebrown/2021/10/27/understanding‐the‐tec...
    1. Burns, W. J. , Slovic, P. , Kasperson, R. E. , Kasperson, J. X. , Renn, O. , & Emani, S. (1993). Incorporating structural models into research on the social amplification of risk: Implications for theory construction and decision making. Risk Analysis, 13(6), 611–624.
    1. Busby, J. , & Duckett, D. (2012). Social risk amplification as an attribution: The case of zoonotic disease outbreaks. Journal of Risk Research, 15(9), 1049–1074.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources