Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41402699›Full record

ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2026

Question Order Effects in Multidimensional Risk Perception Measurement.

Savannah J Meier, Hwanseok Song

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Question Order Effects in Multidimensional Risk Perception Measurement.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Savannah J MeierBrian Lamb School of Communication, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA.ORCID 0009-0003-2093-0870
Hwanseok SongBrian Lamb School of Communication, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0995-0291

Funding

Brian Lamb School of Communication, Purdue University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examines how question order influences responses in multidimensional risk perception measurement. Through a randomized between-subjects experiment (N = 1352) manipulating the sequence of risk perception dimensions, we identified systematic question order effects. When a general risk question followed specific dimensional questions, responses showed significant assimilation effects (i.e., general risk aligned more closely with preceding specific dimension ratings). Consequence dimension responses (severity, affect) showed assimilation effects when preceded by probability dimensions (exposure, susceptibility), while probability dimensions remained stable regardless of ordering. Within subdimensions, severity ratings were influenced by preceding affect questions, and susceptibility ratings were influenced by preceding exposure questions, both displaying assimilation patterns. Testing how individual differences in cognitive sophistication moderate susceptibility to order effects, contrary to our predictions, we found that individuals higher in analytical thinking style demonstrated stronger order effects for general risk questions than those lower in analytical thinking. These findings reveal an asymmetrical pattern where judgments requiring more analytic specificity tend to anchor evaluations that are relatively global, affective, or self-focused.

Indexed as

PerceptionAdultFemaleHumansMaleProbabilityRiskRisk AssessmentYoung Adultanalytic thinkingnumeracyorder effectsrisk perception

Identifiers

PMID41402699
PMCPMC12857591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.