[1]王 磊 伍 麟.论风险研究领域中的社会表征理论[J].南京师大学报(社会科学版),2013,(02):116.
　WANG Lei,WU Lin.Social Representation Theory in Risk Studies[J].Journal of Nanjing Normal University (Social Science Edition),2013,(02):116.
点击复制

论风险研究领域中的社会表征理论
分享到：

《南京师大学报》（社会科学版）[ISSN:1006-6977/CN:61-1281/TN]

卷:
期数:
2013年02期
页码:
116
栏目:
出版日期:
2013-04-30

文章信息/Info

Title:
Social Representation Theory in Risk Studies
作者:
王 磊 伍 麟*
Author(s):
WANG Lei;  WU Lin
关键词:
风险;  社会表征;  风险感知
Keywords:
risk;  social representations;  risk perception
摘要:
社会表征理论以常识理解新事物为出发点,立足于个体和社会层面的交汇点,关注群体成员互动达成共识的同时允许个体差异的存在,认为表征会在人际互动和时间推移过程中发生变化。这些特点可以弥补风险感知的不足。社会表征的结构理论、身份理论和三角巧克力模型为风险表征的研究提供了理论基础; 三角测量法、字词联想法、系列复制法和基本认知图式为其提供了方法论基础。社会表征理论可以成为风险研究的一个新的指导理论。
Abstract:
The current risk studies are conducted by employing such theories as are characterized mainly by the technique orientation, culture orientation and the notion of social amplification of risks. Though having deepened our understanding of risks, these theories have some limitations. The fundamental one is that they all focus on the individual, static and cognitive aspects of risk perception. The social representations theory, however, uses common sense to understand the new things and regard social representations as the interface between individual and social levels. Social representations theory emphasizes the interactions among group members to reach a consensus while allowing individual differences. It argues that representations will change with interpersonal interactions and the passage of time. These features can make up for the limitations of the risk perception theory. The sub-theories of social representations, i.e. the structural theory, identity theory and toblerone model, lay a solid theoretical basis for the studies of risk representations. Different research methods like triangulation, word associations, serial reproduction, and basic cognitive schemes, constitute their methodological basis. Thus, social representations theory can become a new guiding theory for risk studies.

参考文献/References:

Abric, J. C., 1993, “Central system, peripheral system: Their functions and roles in the dynamics of social representations”, Papers on Social Representations, vol.2, pp.75-78.
Abric, J. C., 2001, “A structural approach to social representations”, in K. Deaux & G. Philogène(eds.), Representations of the Social: Bridging Theoretical Traditions, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, pp.42-47.
Bauer, M. and G. Gaskell, 2008, “Social representations theory: A progressive research programme for social psychology”, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, vol.38, pp.335-353.
Breakwell, G. M. and J. Barnett, 2003, “Social amplification of risk and the layering method”, in N. Pidgeon, R. E. Kasperson & P. Slovic(eds.),The Social Amplification of Risk, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,pp.80-101.
Brondi, S., M. Sarrica, R. Cibin, F. Neresini and A. Contarello, 2011, “The Chiampo River 30 years later: Long-term effects of environmental regulations on social representations”, Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology,vol.22, pp.283-299.
Fischhoff, B., P. Slovic, S. Lichtenstein, S. Read and B. Combs, 1978, “How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits”, Policy Sciences, vol.8, pp.127-152.
Karen, B., 2004, “Risk perception research: Socio-cultural perspectives on the public experience of air pollution”, Environment International, vol.30, pp.827-840.
Wilkinson, I. 2001, “Social theories of risk perception: At once indispensable and insufficient”, Current Sociology, vol.49, pp.1-22.
Machlis, G. E. and E. A. Rosa, 1990, “Desired risk broadening the social amplification of risk framework”, Risk Analysis,vol.10, pp.161-168.
Masuda, J. R. and T. Garvin, 2006, “Place, Culture, and the Social Amplication of Risk”, Risk Analysis,vol.26, pp.437-454.
Moscovici, S., 1973, “Introduction”, in C. Herzlich(ed.), Health and Illness: A Social Psychological Analysis, London and New York: Academic Press, pp.9-16.
Moscovici, S., 1984, “The phenomenon of social representations”, in R.M. Farr & S. Moscovici(eds.), Social Representations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3-69.
Starr, C.,1969, “Social benefit versus technological risk”, Science, vol.165,pp.1232-1238.
Wagner,W., J. Valencia and F. Elejabarrieta, 1996, “Relevance, discourse and the ‘hot’ stable core of social representations: A structural analysis of word associations”, British Journal of Social Psychology,vol.35,pp.331-351.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
* 王磊,吉林大学哲学社会学院博士研究生; 伍麟,心理学博士,吉林大学哲学社会学院教授、博士生导师,130012。本文系吉林省社科基金“风险沟通视域中的信任机制研究”(2012B157)阶段性研究成果。
更新日期/Last Update: 2013-04-30