Recent work has provided some indication of the "risk characteristics" that people associate with a variety of food-related potential hazards (Sparks & Shepherd, 1994, Risk Analysis, 14, 5). However, this research provides no indication of group differences in the way that these hazards are viewed, is based on characteristics generated by researchers rather than elicited from respondents and
... [Show full abstract] provides no indication of how these characteristics relate to people's attitudes towards the hazards. In the research reported here, 286 subjects completed questionnaires which asked, inter alia, for their judgements about the characteristics of 15 food-related hazards. For half the respondents, the characteristics were provided by the researchers (derived from theory and empirical work); for the other half, the characteristics had been generated by members of the general public in a separate study. For both groups, highly similar "risk dimensions" were derived from Principal Components Analysis; Preference Mapping techniques revealed attitudinal differences between subgroups of respondents categorized in terms of value orientations; attitudes could be predicted from the derived 'risk dimensions'.