Perceptions of Mercury Risk and Its Management

REFERENCES

• Bronfman NC and Vazquez EL. 2011. A cross cultural study of perceived benefit versus risk as mediators in the trust-acceptance relationship. Risk Anal 31:1919–34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chryssochoidis G, Strada A, and Krystallis A. 2009. Public trust in institutions and information sources regarding risk management and communication: towards integrating extant knowledge. J Risk Res 12:137–85
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark LA and Watson D. 1995. Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological assessment 7:309
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarkson TW. 1992. Mercury: Major issues in environmental health. Environ Health Perspect 100: 31–8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillman DA. 2007. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, John Wiley & Sons Inc, Hoboken, NJ, USA
   Google Scholar
• Evers DC. 2005. Mercury Connections: The extent and effects of mercury pollution in northeastern North America. BioDiversity Institute, Gorham, ME, USA
   Google Scholar
• Feng W and Reisner A. 2011. Factors influencing private and public environmental protection behaviors: Results from a survey of residents in Shaanxi, China. J Environ Manage 92:429–36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson MA and Branscombe NR. 2010. Collective guilt mediates the effect of beliefs about global warming on willingness to engage in mitigation behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology 30:135–42
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finucane ML, Slovic P, Mertz CK, et al. 2000. Gender, race, and perceived risk: The’white male’effect. Health Risk Soc 2:159–72
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzgerald A and Baralt LB. 2010. Media constructions of responsibility for the production and mitigation of environmental harms: The case of mercury-contaminated fish. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 52:341–68
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frewer LJ, Howard C, Hedderley D, et al. 1998. Methodological Approaches to Assessing Risk Perceptions Associated with Food‐Related Hazards. Risk Anal 18:95–102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habron G, Barbier M, and Kinnunen R. 2008. Local understanding of fish consumption advisory risks in Michigan's Upper Peninsula: The role of structure, culture, and agency. Rural Sociology 73:275–99
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kellstedt PM, Zahran S, and Vedlitz A. 2008. Personal efficacy, the information environment, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk Anal 28:113–26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knobelocha L, Andersona H, Imma P, et al. 2005. Fish consumption, advisory awareness, and hair mercury levels among women of child bearing age. Environ Res 97:220–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krewski D, Lemyre L, Turner MC, et al. 2006. Public perception of population health risks in Canada: Health hazards and sources of information. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 12:626–44
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubell M, Zahran S, and Vedlitz A. 2007. Collective action and citizen responses to global warming. Polit Behav 29:391–413
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahaffey KR, Clickner RP, and Bodurow CC. 2004. Blood organic mercury and dietary mercury intake: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999 and 2000. Environ Health Perspect 112:562–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mergler D, Anderson HA, Chan LHM, et al. 2007. Methylmercury exposure and health effects in humans: A worldwide concern. Ambio 36:3–11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Midden CJH and Huijts N. 2009. The role of trust in the affective evaluation of novel risks: The case of CO2 storage. Risk Anal 29:743–51
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nacci D, Pelletier M, Lake J, et al. 2005. An approach to predict risks to wildlife populations from mercury and other stressors. Ecotoxicology 14:283–93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordlund AM and Garvill J. 2003. Effects of values, problem awareness, and personal norm on willingness to reduce personal car use. Journal of environmental psychology 23:339–47
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor RE, Bord RJ, and Fisher A. 1999. Risk perceptions, general environmental beliefs, and willingness to address climate change. Risk Anal 19:461–71
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheuhammer AM, Meye MW, Sandheinrich MB, et al. 2007. Effects of environmental methylmercury on the health of wild birds, mammals, and fish. Ambio 36:12–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scudder BC, Chasar LC, Wentz DA, et al. 2009. Mercury in fish, bed sediment, and water from streams across the United States, 1998–2005. Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5109. US Geological Survey, Reston, VA, USA
   Google Scholar
• Shimshacka JP, Ward MB, and Beatty TKM. 2007. Mercury advisories: Information, education, and fish consumption. J Environ Econ Manage 53:158–79
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siegrist M and Cvetkovich G. 2000. Perception of hazards: The role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Anal 20:13–20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siegrist M, Gutscher H and Earle TC. 2005. Perception of risk: the influence of general trust, and general confidence. J Risk Res 8:145–56
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith CM and Trip LJ. 2005. Mercury policy and science in Northeastern North America: The mercury action plan of the New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers. Ecotoxicology 14:19–35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stahl LL, Snyder BD, Olsen AR, et al. 2009. Contaminants in fish tissue from US lakes and reservoirs: A national probabilistic study. Environ Monit Assess 150:3–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stern PC. 2000. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J Soc Iss 56:407–24
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swain EB, Jakus PM, Rice G, et al. 2007. Socioeconomic consequences of mercury use and pollution. Ambio 36:45–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tilden J, Hanrahan LP, Anderson H, et al. 1997. Health advisories for consumers of Great Lakes sport fish: Is the message being received? Environ Health Perspect 105:1360–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 2005. Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Clean Air Mercury Rule: Final Report. EPA-452/R-05-003. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
   Google Scholar
• USEPA. 2006. EPA's Roadmap for Mercury. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0013. Washington, DC, USA
   Google Scholar
• USEPA. 2007. Fact Sheet: 2005/2006 National Listing of Fish Advisories. Washington, DC, USA
   Google Scholar
• USEPA. 2008. EPA's Report on Environment. EPA/600/R-07/045F. Washington, DC, USA
   Google Scholar
• USEPA. 2009. The national study of chemical residues in lake fish tissue. EPA-823-R-09–006. Washington, DC
   Google Scholar
• Viklund MJ. 2003. Trust and risk perception in western Europe: A cross-national study. Risk Anal 23:727–38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitfield SC, Rosa EA, Dan A, et al. 2009. The future of nuclear power: Value orientations and risk perception. Risk Anal 29:425–37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar