Explaining the ‘gender-risk effect’ in risk perception research: a qualitative secondary analysis study / Explicando el ‘efecto género-riesgo’ en la investigación de la percepción del riesgo: un estudio cualitativo de análisis secundario

References / Referencias

• Anderson, C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2006). Power, optimism and risk taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 511–536. doi:10.1002/ejsp.324
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bickerstaff, K., Simmons, P., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2008). Constructing responsibility for risk(s): Negotiating citizen-state relationships. Environment and Planning A, 40, 1312–1330.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Billig, M. (2005). Laughter and ridicule: Towards a social critique of humour. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Brent, K. (2004). Gender, race and perceived environmental risk: The ‘white male’ effect in Cancer Alley, LA. Sociological Spectrum, 24, 453–478. doi:10.1080/02732170490459485  
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bronson, D. (2012). Geoengineering: A feminist issue? Ottawa, ON: ECT Group.
   Google Scholar
• Burman, E., Alldred, P., Bewley, C., Goldberg, B., Heenan, C., & Marks, D. (1999). Challenging women: Psychology’s exclusions, feminist possibilities. Buckingham: OUP.
   Google Scholar
• Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D. C., & Schafer, W. D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 367–383. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.3.367
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, S. (1993). Risk, masculinity and modernity: Understandings of gender and danger in the modern world (Unpublished PhD thesis). Lancaster University.
   Google Scholar
• Coltart, C., & Henwood, K. (2012). On paternal subjectivity: A qualitative longitudinal and psychosocial case analysis of men’s classed positions and transitions to first-time fatherhood. Qualitative Research, 12, 35–52. doi:10.1177/1468794111426224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidson, D. J., & Freudenburg, W. R. (1996). Gender and environmental risk concerns: A review and analysis of available research. Environment and Behavior, 28, 302–339. doi:10.1177/0013916596283003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the C21. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Edley, N., & Wetherell, M. (1997). Jockeying for position: The construction OF masculine identities. Discourse and Society, 8, 203–217. doi:10.1177/0957926597008002004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulkner, W. (2000a). The power and the pleasure? A research agenda for ‘making gender stick’ to engineers. Science, Technology and Human Values, 25, 87–119. doi:10.1177/016224390002500104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulkner, W. (2000b). Dualisms, hierarchies and gender in engineering. Social Studies of Science, 30, 759–792. doi:10.1177/030631200030005005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finn, M., & Henwood, K. (2009). Exploring masculinities within men’s identificatory imaginings of first-time fatherhood. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 547–562. doi:10.1348/014466608X386099
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, S., & Davis, K. (Eds.). (1993). Negotiating at the margins: The gendered discourse of power and resistance. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flynn, J., Slovic, P., & Mertz, C. K. (1994). Gender, race and perception of environmental health risks. Risk Analysis, 14, 1101–1108. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00082.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frosh, S. (2002). Afterwords: The personal in gender, culture and psychotherapy. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greenberg, M R., & Schneider, D F. (1995). Gender differences in risk perception: Effects differ in stressed vs non-stressed environments. Risk Analysis, 15, 503–511. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb00343.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustafson, P. E. (1998). Gender differences in risk perception: Theoretical and methodological perspectives. Risk Analysis, 18, 805–811. doi:10.1023/B:RIAN.0000005926.03250.c0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henwood, K. (2008). Qualitative research, reflexivity and living with risk: Valuing and practicing epistemic reflexivity and centering marginality. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 5, 45–55. doi:10.1080/14780880701863575
   Google Scholar
• Henwood, K. L., Gill, R., & Mclean, C. (2002). The changing man. Psychologist, 15, 182–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henwood, K. L.Griffin, C., & Phoenix, A. (Eds.). (1998). Standpoints and differences: Essays in the practice of feminist psychology. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Henwood, K., & Parker, I. (1994). Qualitative social psychology. Special issue of the Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 4, Part 4. pp. 219–223 doi:10.1002/casp.2450040402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henwood, K. L., Parkhill, K. A., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2008). Science, technology and risk perception: From gender differences to the effects made by gender. Equal Opportunities International, 27, 662–676. doi:10.1108/02610150810916730
   Google Scholar
• Henwood, K. L., & Pidgeon, N. F. (1992). Qualitative research and psychological theorizing. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 97–111. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1992.tb02426.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henwood, K., & Pidgeon, N. (1995). Remaking the link: Qualitative research and feminist standpoint theory. Feminism and Psychology, 5, 7–30. doi:10.1177/0959353595051003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henwood, K. L., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2003). Grounded theory in psychology. In P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes, & L. Yardley (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp. 131–155). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
   Google Scholar
• Henwood, K. L., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2012). Risk and Identity Futures. UK Foresight Future of Identities Project Report DR18, Department of Business, Innovation and Skills. Retrieved from http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/foresight/docs/identity/13-519-identity-and-change-through-a%20risk-lens.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hollway, W. (1989). Subjectivity and method: Meanings, practices and science. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hollway, W., & Jefferson, T. (1997). The risk society in an age of anxiety: Situating fear of crime. The British Journal of Sociology, 48, 255–266. doi:10.2307/591751
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horowitz, R., & Mohun, A. (1998). His and hers: Gender, consumption and technology. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jeanes, E. L. (2007). The doing and undoing of gender: The importance of being a credible female victim. Gender, Work & Organization, 14, 552–571. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0432.2007.00371.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahan, D M., Braman, D., Gastil, J., Slovic, P., & Mertz, C. K. (2007). Culture and identity-protective cognition: Explaining the white-male effect in risk perception. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 4, 465–505. doi:10.1111/j.1740-1461.2007.00097.x
   Google Scholar
• Kleif, T., & Faulkner, W. (2003). ‘I’m no athlete [but] I can make this thing dance!’ – Men’s pleasures in technology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 28, 296–325. doi:10.1177/0162243902250908
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohan, M. (2000). Constructive tensions in feminist technology studies. Social Studies of Science, 30, 895–916. doi:10.1177/030631200030006003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mac an Ghaill, M. (1996). Understanding masculinities. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• MacCormick, C., & Strathern, M. (1992). Nature, culture, gender. Cambridge: CUP.
   Google Scholar
• Masco, J. (2006). The nuclear borderlands: The manhattan project in post-cold war New Mexico. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morioka, R. (2014). Gender Difference in the health risk perceptions of radiation from Fukushima in Japan: The role of hegemonic masculinity. Social Science and Medicine, 107, 105–112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olofsson, A., & Rashid, S. (2011). The white (male) effect and risk perception: Can equality make a difference? Risk Analysis, 31, 1016–1032. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01566.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parkhill, K. A., Henwood, K. L., Pidgeon, N. F., & Simmons, P. (2011). Laughing it off? Humour, affect and emotion work in communities living with nuclear risk. The British Journal of Sociology, 62, 324–346. doi:10.1111/j.1468-4446.2011.01367.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perrow, C. (1999). Normal accidents: Living with high risk technologies (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Phoenix, A., Frosh, S., & Pattman, R. (2003). Producing contradictory masculine subject positions: Narratives of threat, homophobia and bullying in 11–14 year old boys. Journal of Social Issues, 59, 179–195. doi:10.1111/1540-4560.t01-1-00011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pidgeon, N. F., & Beattie, J. (1998). The psychology of risk and uncertainty. In P. Calow (Ed.), Handbook of environmental risk assessment and management (pp. 289–318). Oxford: Blackwell Science.
   Google Scholar
• Pidgeon, N. F., Hood, C., Jones, D., Turner, B., & Gibson, R. (1992). Risk perception. In F. Warner (Ed.), Risk: Analysis, perception and management (pp. 89–134). London: The Royal Society.
   Google Scholar
• Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Satterfield, T A., Mertz, C. K., & Slovic, P. (2004). Discrimination, vulnerability and justice in the face of risk. Risk Analysis, 24, 115–129. doi:10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00416.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheman, N. (1993). Introduction: The unavoidability of gender. In N. Scheman (Ed.), Engenderings: Constructions of knowledge, authority and privilege (pp. 1–8). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Segal, L. (1987). Is the future female? Troubles thoughts on contemporary feminism. London: Virago.
   Google Scholar
• Segal, L. (1997). Slow motion: Changing masculinities, changing men. London: Virago.
   Google Scholar
• Shirani, F., Butler, C., Henwood, K., Parkhill, K., & Pidgeon, N. (2013). Disconnected futures: Exploring notions of ethical responsibility in energy practices. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 18, 455–468. doi:10.1080/13549839.2013.779236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slovic, P. (2000). The perception of risk. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Squire, C. (Ed.). (2000). Culture in psychology. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, B. A., & Pidgeon, N. F. (1997). Man made disasters (2nd ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Wetherell, M. (1996). Life histories, social histories in identities, groups and social issues (pp. 299–361). London: Sage (in association with the Open University).
   Google Scholar
• Wetherell, M., & Edley, N. (1999). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity: Imaginary positions and psycho-discursive practices. Feminism and Psychology, 9, 335–356. doi:10.1177/0959353599009003012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wetherell, M.,Taylor, S., & Yates, S. (Eds.). (2001). Discourse as data. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Willott, S., & Griffin, C. (1999). Building your own lifeboat: Working class male offenders talk about economic crime. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 445–460. doi:10.1348/014466699164266
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. (1992). Risk and social learning: Reification to engagement. In S. Krimsky & D. Golding (Eds.), Social theories of risk (pp. 275–297). Westport, CT: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Wynne, B., & Irwin, A. (1996). Misunderstanding science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar