FIND DATA: By Journal | Sites   ANALYZE DATA: Help with R | SPSS | Stata | Excel   WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
   FIND DATA: By Journal | Sites   WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
If this link is broken, please report as broken. You can also submit updates (will be reviewed).

Status vs. Facts: Why Americans' Risk Priorities Reflect Values Not Ignorance

Status JudgmentsRisk PrioritiesMoral ValuesUS VotersPolitical BehaviorAJPS13 Stata files3 datasetsDataverse
Political Behavior subfield banner

Voters don't always misperceive risk magnitudes—even when highly informed—according to a new study. Instead, their priorities often reflect moral judgments about deserving victims and government's proper role in society.

This research, based on survey responses from 3,000 Americans, shows that evaluations of nine victim-status dimensions explain policy preferences better than perceived danger levels.

🔍 Key findings:

  • Perceived danger correlated strongly with actual mortality (.82)
  • Status judgments were more predictive of risk priorities
  • Results held across political divides and demographics

The article argues voters' value systems—not lack of knowledge—shape their willingness to embrace preventive policies.

Article card for article: Priorities for Preventive Action: Explaining Americans' Divergent Reactions to 100 Public Risks
Priorities for Preventive Action: Explaining Americans' Divergent Reactions to 100 Public Risks was authored by Jeffrey Friedman. It was published by Wiley in AJPS in 2019.
Find on Google Scholar
Find on JSTOR
Find on Wiley
American Journal of Political Science
Edit article record marker