$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$

연합인증

연합인증 가입 기관의 연구자들은 소속기관의 인증정보(ID와 암호)를 이용해 다른 대학, 연구기관, 서비스 공급자의 다양한 온라인 자원과 연구 데이터를 이용할 수 있습니다.

이는 여행자가 자국에서 발행 받은 여권으로 세계 각국을 자유롭게 여행할 수 있는 것과 같습니다.

연합인증으로 이용이 가능한 서비스는 NTIS, DataON, Edison, Kafe, Webinar 등이 있습니다.

한번의 인증절차만으로 연합인증 가입 서비스에 추가 로그인 없이 이용이 가능합니다.

다만, 연합인증을 위해서는 최초 1회만 인증 절차가 필요합니다. (회원이 아닐 경우 회원 가입이 필요합니다.)

연합인증 절차는 다음과 같습니다.

최초이용시에는
ScienceON에 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 로그인 (본인 확인 또는 회원가입) → 서비스 이용

그 이후에는
ScienceON 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 서비스 이용

연합인증을 활용하시면 KISTI가 제공하는 다양한 서비스를 편리하게 이용하실 수 있습니다.

Development of the nuclear safety trust indicator

Nuclear engineering and technology : an international journal of the Korean Nuclear Society, v.50 no.7, 2018년, pp.1168 - 1172  

Cho, SeongKyung (Myongji Univ.)

Abstract AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

This study went beyond making an indicator simply based on theoretical arguments, and explored a wide spectrum of different types of perceptions about energy safety to make a concept of energy safety for the Korean society. The energy safety schemata of people can be divided into three types. Type1 ...

주제어

AI 본문요약
AI-Helper 아이콘 AI-Helper

* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.

제안 방법

  • Accordingly, to measure the trust in nuclear safety, this study attempts to develop an indicator that can measure citizens'perception of the safety of nuclear power plants and their demand for it, and propose a method of contributing to the policy process based on the measurement and result analysis of the developed indicator.
  • 1%p(95% confidence level). Also, factor analysis was conducted based on the survey result to develop the nuclear safety trust indicator.
  • risk perception, responsibility, honesty, expertise and procedural justification. And the items for specifically evaluating them were developed, and factor analysis was conducted, and as a result, the validity of each item was proven.
  • In particular, this study went beyond making an indicator simply based on theoretical arguments, and explored a wide spectrum of different types of perceptions about energy safety to make a concept of energy safety for the Korean society. Questions were designed on the basis of the characteristics, differences and commonalities of the three types of perceptions(concern about multi-level risks-responsibility-centric, (concern about security and personal burden-expertise centric, concern about health and personal burden-responsibility-centric energy safety schema) explored through the Q methodology, and Koreans' perception of nuclear safety was examined.
  • Meanwhile, to develop a nuclear safety trust indicator, a survey was conducted. The proportional allocation method by region, gender and age was used to receive responses to the survey from 1023 people.
  • Accordingly, it is necessary to specify the target as the main agent that judges nuclear safety with authority. This study attempts to conceptualize trust in nuclear safety as giving a positive value to nuclear safety in the relationship with the main agent that judge nuclear safety with authority although it cannot fully understand nuclear safety rationally.
  • Through theoretical discussions and exploration of energy safety schema types, this study attempts to recognize that risk perception, responsibility, honesty, expertise, and procedural justification of the policy decision making process are important factors of trust in nuclear safety, and verify if it has validity and trustworthiness as an indicator through factor analysis.

대상 데이터

  • To understand the concept of safety in people's perception on this basis, the Q methodology was used to explore different types of energy safety schemata. 57 citizens were selected as the through P sampling, and the answers to Q questions were collected online from November 14, 2017 to November 15, 2017. In the Q methodology, the P sample itself is a variable, and unlike the general statistical method, it is not intended to generalize the research results, but to understand the phenomenon, so the number of samples and the method of selecting the samples are not fixed.
  • Meanwhile, to develop a nuclear safety trust indicator, a survey was conducted. The proportional allocation method by region, gender and age was used to receive responses to the survey from 1023 people. The online survey through e-mail was conducted for 4 days from November 21, 2017 till November 24, 2017, and the sampling error is ±3.

이론/모형

  • Here, citizens are defined as subjects for research, and the panel of Korean research is used to extract proportional allocation based on gender, age, and educational background. To ensure the reality of the different type of energy safety schemata, unforced sorting was used to measure the degree of consent on an 11-point scale. And the result of Q sorting was analyzed using the CENSORT program.
본문요약 정보가 도움이 되었나요?

참고문헌 (13)

  1. J.R. Gibb, Climate for trust formation, in: L.P. Bradford, J.R. Gibb, K. Benne (Eds.), T-group Theory and Laboratory Method, Wiley, NY, 1964. 

  2. V. Braithwaite, M. Levi, Trust and Governance, Russel Sage Foundation, NY, 1998. 

  3. D.J. McAllister, Affect and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations, Acad. Manag. J. 38 (1) (1995) 524-595. 

  4. A.K. Mishra, Organizational responses to crisis: the centrality of trust, in: R.M. Kramer, T.R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theories and Research, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 1996. 

  5. B. Barber, The Logic & Limited of Trust, Rutgers Univ. Press, New Brunswick, NJ, 1983. 

  6. J.K. Butler, Toward understanding and measuring conditions of trust: evolution of condition of trust inventory, J. Manag. 17 (1991) 643-663. 

  7. D. Gambetta, Trust, Basil Blackwell, NY, 1998. 

  8. R.C. Mayer, J.H. Davis, F.D. Schoorman, An integrative model of organizational trust, Acad. Manag. Rev. 20 (3) (1995) 709-734. 

  9. W. Mishler, R. Rose, Trust, distrust and skepticism: popular evaluations of civil and political institutions in post-communist societies, J. Polit. 59 (2) (1997) 418-451. 

  10. S.M. Rousseau, S.B. Sitkin, R.S. Bur, C. Camerer, Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust, Acad. Manag. Rev. 23 (1998) 393-404. 

  11. N. Luhmann, Trust and Power, John Wiely & Sons, Chichester, 1979. 

  12. T.C. Earle, Trust in risk management: a model-based review of empirical research, Risk Anal. 30 (4) (2010) 541-574. 

  13. S.R. Brown, Political Subjectivity: Applications of Q Methodology in Political Science, Yale Univ. Press, New Heaven & London, 1989. 

관련 콘텐츠

오픈액세스(OA) 유형

GOLD

오픈액세스 학술지에 출판된 논문

섹션별 컨텐츠 바로가기

AI-Helper ※ AI-Helper는 오픈소스 모델을 사용합니다.

AI-Helper 아이콘
AI-Helper
안녕하세요, AI-Helper입니다. 좌측 "선택된 텍스트"에서 텍스트를 선택하여 요약, 번역, 용어설명을 실행하세요.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.

선택된 텍스트