Visschers, Vivianne
Lade...
E-Mail-Adresse
Geburtsdatum
Projekt
Organisationseinheiten
Berufsbeschreibung
Nachname
Visschers
Vorname
Vivianne
Name
Visschers, Vivianne
3 Ergebnisse
Suchergebnisse
Gerade angezeigt 1 - 3 von 3
- PublikationAffect or information? Examining drivers of public preferences of future energy portfolios in Switzerland(Elsevier, 2019) Jobin, Marilou; Visschers, Vivianne; Arvai, Joseph; Siegrist, Michael [in: Energy Research & Social Science]The energy transition in Switzerland, as in many other countries, aims to increase the proportion of electricity produced using renewable energy technologies. In this context, governmental agencies and other institutions have attempted to communicate the implications of (domestic) electricity systems through the use of web-based and interactive decision support systems (DSSs). Studies show that, when no additional information is provided, preferences concerning the future electricity mix are mainly driven by the affective reactions that energy technologies evoke. A question remains, however, regarding how people engage with the information provided in a DSS, as well as whether such information is influential in terms of shaping people’s choices. We asked our participants to build an electricity portfolio using a DSS, which modeled the Swiss electricity system. The participants’ political orientation and their affective reactions to different energy technologies guided their information search, as well as the choice of energy technologies within their portfolio. The attention paid to the information provided was not directly related to the participants’ portfolio choices. The selective processing of information, which was based on the participants’ prior attitudes, suggests that they target information they are already familiar with in the DSS. However, this also illustrates a caveat previously identified in motivated political reasoning, since selective information processing, together with the tendency to disconfirm information that is incongruent with prior beliefs, can lead to the polarization of previously held views. As the information provided through the DSS we tested was unable to change the participants’ affective-cognitive evaluation of energy technologies, its use should be carefully considered in light of the possible effects of consolidating existing beliefs.01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschrift
- PublikationHow to improve consumers' environmental sustainability judgements of foods(Elsevier, 2018) Lazzarini, Gianna A.; Visschers, Vivianne; Siegrist, Michael [in: Journal of Cleaner Production]Food production and consumption account for approximately one-third of households' environmental impact. Consumers thus play a major role in the shift towards more sustainable foods and diets. An overall sustainability label or simple guidelines may enable consumers to make more environmentally friendly food choices, but whether such information-based tools improve consumers' ability to choose environmentally sustainable foods has not been empirically investigated. This study's online choice task experiment shows that eco-labels and guidelines marginally increased consumers' accuracy in selecting environmentally friendly foods. Respondents adhered, however, more to guidelines than to eco-labels and led to choices with lower environmental impact. In addition, respondents showed several misconceptions related to the environmental performance of protein products, which were resistant to both eco-labels and guidelines. These findings suggest that new, costly labels may not improve consumers' environmental judgements. Instead, addressing consumers' misconceptions and finding ways to promote environmentally sustainable food purchases is essential.01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschrift
- PublikationDifferences in risk perception between hazards and between individuals(Springer, 2018) Visschers, Vivianne; Siegrist, Michael; Raue, Martina; Lermer, Eva; Streicher, Bernhard [in: Psychological Perspectives on Risk and Risk Analysis]How people think about a hazard often deviates from experts’ assessment of its probability and severity. The aim of this chapter is to clarify how people perceive risks. We thereby focus on two important research lines: (1) research on the psychometric paradigm, which explains variations between the perceptions of different risks, and (2) research on factors that may determine an individual’s perception of a risk (i.e., perceived benefits, trust, knowledge, affective associations, values, and fairness). Findings from studies about various risks (e.g., genetically modified organisms, food additives, and climate change) are reviewed in order to provide practical implications for risk management and communication. Overall, this chapter shows that the roles of benefit perception, trust, knowledge, affective associations, personal values, and fairness are not always straightforward; different factors appear involved in the perception of different hazards. We recommend practitioners, when they encounter a new hazard, to consult previous studies about similar hazards in order to identify the factors that describe the public’s perception of the new04 - Beitrag Sammelband oder Konferenzschrift