Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Moderating effect of regulatory focus on public acceptance of nuclear energy

  • He, Yanling (Key Laboratory of Neutronics and Radiation Safety, Institute of Nuclear Energy Safety Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences) ;
  • Li, Yazhou (Key Laboratory of Neutronics and Radiation Safety, Institute of Nuclear Energy Safety Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences) ;
  • Xia, Dongqin (Key Laboratory of Neutronics and Radiation Safety, Institute of Nuclear Energy Safety Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences) ;
  • Zhang, Tingting (Key Laboratory of Neutronics and Radiation Safety, Institute of Nuclear Energy Safety Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences) ;
  • Wang, Yongliang (Key Laboratory of Neutronics and Radiation Safety, Institute of Nuclear Energy Safety Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences) ;
  • Hu, Li (Key Laboratory of Neutronics and Radiation Safety, Institute of Nuclear Energy Safety Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences) ;
  • Gu, Jibao (School of Management, University of Science and Technology) ;
  • Wu, Yican (Key Laboratory of Neutronics and Radiation Safety, Institute of Nuclear Energy Safety Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences)
  • Received : 2018.12.10
  • Accepted : 2019.06.02
  • Published : 2019.12.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Public acceptance has become the most critical question for sustainable development of nuclear energy in recent decades. Many researches concentrated on risk and benefit perception, which were deemed as the most influential factors of Public Acceptance of Nuclear Energy (PANE). But few researches focused on psychological factors including regulatory focus. Therefore, this paper aimed to explore the moderating effect of regulatory focus on PANE based on Regulatory Focus Theory in order to find ways to increase/decrease PANE. An Internet-based survey had been carried out in China nationwide. The results indicated that trust in government was positively related to PANE and this relationship was mediated by risk and benefit perception. In addition, the strength of the associations between risk and benefit perception and PANE were moderated by regulatory focus, consisting of prevention focus and promotion focus. Prevention focus strengthened the negative relationship between risk perception and PANE, while promotion focus weakened. Moreover, promotion focus weakened the positive relationship between benefit perception and PANE, but no significant moderating effect of prevention focus was founded on the relationship between benefit perception and PANE. Some policy implications were also proposed on the basis of above-mentioned findings.

Keywords

References

  1. A.M. Weinberg, The maturity and future of nuclear energy, Am. Sci. 64 (1975) 79-89.
  2. IAEA, International status and prospects for nuclear power 2017, in: Board of Governors General Conference, 2017, pp. 1-16. GOV/INF/2017/12-GC(61)/INF/8.
  3. N Energy, Technology Roadmap: Nuclear Energy, OECD/IEA and OECD/NEA, 2015, pp. 14-15, 2015.
  4. L. Huang, R. He, Q. Yang, J. Chen, Y. Zhou, J.K. Hammitt, X. Lu, J. Bi, Y. Liu, The changing risk perception towards nuclear power in China after the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan, Energy Policy 120 (2018) 294-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.05.007
  5. Y. Wu, Public acceptance of constructing coastal/inland nuclear power plants in post-Fukushima China, Energy Policy 101 (2017) 484-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.11.008
  6. S. Wang, J. Wang, S. Lin, J. Li, Public perceptions and acceptance of nuclear energy in China: the role of public knowledge, perceived benefit, perceived risk and public engagement, Energy Policy 126 (2019) 352-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.11.040
  7. Y. Guo, T. Ren, When it is unfamiliar to me: local acceptance of planned nuclear power plants in China in the post-fukushima era, Energy Policy 100 (2017) 113-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.10.002
  8. C. Liu, Z. Zhang, S. Kidd, Establishing an objective system for the assessment of public acceptance of nuclear power in China, Nucl. Eng. Des. 238 (2008) 2834-2838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2008.04.001
  9. Y. Wang, J. Li, A causal model explaining Chinese university students' acceptance of nuclear power, Prog. Nucl. Energy 88 (2016) 165-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2016.01.002
  10. V.H.M. Visschers, M. Siegrist, How a nuclear power plant accident influences acceptance of nuclear power: results of a longitudinal study before and after the Fukushima disaster, Risk Anal. 33 (2013) 333-347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01861.x
  11. Y. Ryu, S. Kim, S. Kim, Does trust matter? Analyzing the impact of trust on the perceived risk and acceptance of nuclear power energy, Sustainability 10 (2018).
  12. M. Siegrist, The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology, Risk Anal. 20 (2000) 195-204. https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.202020
  13. Q. Xiao, H. Liu, M.W. Feldman, How does trust affect acceptance of a nuclear power plant (NPP): a survey among people living with Qinshan NPP in China, PLoS One 12 (2017), e0187941. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187941
  14. P. Bryant, R. Dunford, The influence of regulatory focus on risky decisionmaking, Appl. Psychol. 57 (2008) 335-359. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2007.00319.x
  15. E.T. Higgins, Beyond pleasure and pain, Am. Psychol. 52 (1997) 1280-1300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280
  16. E.T. Higgins, Promotion and prevention: regulatory focus as A motivational principle, Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 30 (1998) 1-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60381-0
  17. J.L. Aaker, A.Y. Lee, Understanding regulatory fit, J. Mark. Res. 43 (2006) 15-19. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.1.15
  18. C.L. Anderson, R. Agarwal, Practicing Safe Computing: a Multimedia Empirical Examination of Home Computer User Security Behavioral Intentions, Society for Information Management and The Management Information Systems Research Center, 2010.
  19. Y. He, Q. Chen, S. Kitkuakul, L.T. Wright, Regulatory focus and technology acceptance: perceived ease of use and usefulness as efficacy, Cogent Bus. Manag. 5 (2018).
  20. Y. Zhang, V. Mittal, The attractiveness of enriched and impoverished options: culture, self-construal, and regulatory focus, Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 33 (2007) 588. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206296954
  21. S.M. Forsythe, B. Shi, Consumer patronage and risk perceptions in Internet shopping, J. Bus. Res. 56 (2003) 867-875. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00273-9
  22. N. Vol, Advances in the psychology of consumer investment, Adv. Consum. Res. 31 (2004) 604-606.
  23. P. Atorough, B. Donaldson, The relationship between regulatory focus and online shopping-perceived risk, affect, and consumers' response to online marketing, Int. J. Internet Mark. Advert. 7 (2012).
  24. Y. Chang, S.F. Wong, H. Lee, S.P. Jeong, What motivates Chinese consumers to adopt FinTech services, in: Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Electronic Commerce e-Commerce in Smart connected World-ICEC '16, 2016, pp. 1-3.
  25. Q. Zhao, C.-D. Chen, J.-L. Wang, P.-C. Chen, Determinants of backers' funding intention in crowdfunding: social exchange theory and regulatory focus, Telematics Inf. 34 (2017) 370-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.06.006
  26. R. Kark, D. Van Dijk, D.R. Vashdi, Motivated or demotivated to Be creative: the role of self-regulatory focus in transformational and transactional leadership processes, Appl. Psychol. 67 (2018) 186-224. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12122
  27. J.R. Parkins, R. Haluza-DeLay, Social and Ethical Considerations of Nuclear Power Development, 2011.
  28. D. Kyne, B. Bolin, Emerging environmental justice issues in nuclear power and radioactive contamination, Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 13 (2016) 700. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13070700
  29. P. Slovic, Perception of risk, Science 236 (1987) 280-285. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507
  30. G.C. Michael Siegrist, C. Roth, Salient Value Similarity, Social Trust, and Risk-Benefit Perception, 2000.
  31. M. Siegrist, H. Gutscher, T.C. Earle, Perception of risk: the influence of general trust, and general confidence, J. Risk Res. 8 (2006) 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/1366987032000105315
  32. V.H.M. Visschers, C. Keller, M. Siegrist, Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: investigating an explanatory model, Energy Policy 39 (2011) 3621-3629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.03.064
  33. S.S. Ho, T. Oshita, J. Looi, A.D. Leong, A.S. Chuah, Exploring public perceptions of benefits and risks, trust, and acceptance of nuclear energy in Thailand and Vietnam: a qualitative approach, Energy Policy 127 (2019) 259-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.12.011
  34. T.-Y. Park, S. Kim, L.-K. Sung, Fair pay dispersion: a regulatory focus theory view, Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 142 (2017) 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.07.003
  35. E. Crowe, E.T. Higgins, Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: promotion and prevention in decision-making, Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 69 (1997) 117-132. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.2675
  36. Y.D. Kim, Y.-W. Ha, Who is afraid of disposition of financial assets? The moderating role of regulatory focus in the disposition effect, Mark. Lett. 27 (2014) 159-169.
  37. F. Gino, J.D. Margolis, Bringing ethics into focus: how regulatory focus and risk preferences influence (Un)ethical behavior, Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 115 (2011) 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.01.006
  38. J. Gu, V.K. Bohns, G.J. Leonardelli, Regulatory focus and interdependent economic decision-making, J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49 (2013) 692-698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.11.008
  39. M. Hassenzahl, M. Schobel, T. Trautmann, How motivational orientation influences the evaluation and choice of hedonic and pragmatic interactive products: the role of regulatory focus, Interact. Comput. 20 (2008) 473-479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2008.05.001
  40. D.T. Kao, Exploring the effect of regulatory focus on ad attitudes: the moderating roles of message sidedness and argument quality, Int. J. Psychol. : J. Int. Psychol. 47 (2012) 142-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2011.628672
  41. L. Werth, J. Foerster, How regulatory focus influences consumer behavior, Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 37 (2007) 33-51. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.343
  42. D.R. Hekman, D. van Knippenberg, M.G. Pratt, Channeling identification: how perceived regulatory focus moderates the influence of organizational and professional identification on professional employees' diagnosis and treatment behaviors, Hum. Relat. 69 (2015) 753-780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726715599240
  43. T. Whitford, S.A. Moss, Transformational leadership in distributed work groups: the moderating role of follower regulatory focus and goal orientation, Commun. Res. 36 (2009) 810-837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209346800
  44. J.S. Smith, M.R. Gleim, S.G. Robinson, W.J. Kettinger, S.-H.S. Park, Using an old dog for new tricks: a regulatory focus perspective on consumer acceptance of RFID applications, J. Serv. Res. 17 (2013) 85-101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670513501394
  45. L. Mannetti, A. Brizi, M. Giacomantonio, E.T. Higgins, Framing political messages to fit the audience's regulatory orientation: how to improve the efficacy of the same message content, PLoS One 8 (2013), e77040. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0077040
  46. J. Beck, A. Eichinger, K. Bengler, Trait, state or artefact? Assessing experts' regulatory focus in nuclear power plant control, Cognit. Technol. Work 16 (2014) 531-539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-014-0283-1
  47. R.M. Baron, D.A. Kenny, The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual,strategic, and statistical considerations, J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 51 (1986) 1173-1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
  48. A. Florack, J. Palcu, M. Friese, The moderating role of regulatory focus on the social modeling of food intake, Appetite 69 (2013) 114-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2013.05.012
  49. A. Berezowska, A.R.H. Fischer, H.C.M. Van Trijp, The interplay between regulatory focus and temporal distance in the health context, Br. J. Health Psychol. 23 (2018) 22-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12272
  50. N. Tsujikawa, S. Tsuchida, T. Shiotani, Changes in the factors influencing public acceptance of nuclear power generation in Japan since the 2011 fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, Risk Anal. 36 (2016) 98-113. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12447
  51. D.H. McKnight, V. Choudhury, C. Kacmar, Developing and Validating Trust Measures for e-Commerce: an Integrative Typology, Inf. Syst. Res. 13 (2002) 334-359. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.3.334.81
  52. V.H.M. Visschers, M. Siegrist, Find the differences and the similarities: relating perceived benefits, perceived costs and protected values to acceptance of five energy technologies, J. Environ. Psychol. 40 (2014) 117-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.05.007
  53. Y. Shin, M.S. Kim, J.N. Choi, M. Kim, W.-K. Oh, Does leader-follower regulatory fit matter? The role of regulatory fit in followers' organizational citizenship behavior, J. Manag. 43 (2016) 1211-1233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314546867
  54. D. Xia, Y. Li, Y. He, T. Zhang, Y. Wang, J. Gu, Exploring the role of cultural individualism and collectivism on public acceptance of nuclear energy, Energy Policy 132 (2019) 208-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.05.014
  55. E.T. Higgins, S. Spiegel, Promotion and prevention strategies for selfregulation: a motivated cognition perspective, in: R. Baumeister, K. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation, 2004, pp. 171-187.
  56. Kang-Yin, Dong, Ren-Jin, Hong-Dian, Jiang, A review of China's energy consumption structure and outlook based on a long-range energy alternatives modeling tool, Petrol. Sci. 14 (2017) 214-227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12182-016-0136-z
  57. S. Zhou, X. Zhang, Nuclear energy development in China: a study of opportunities and challenges, Energy 35 (2010) 4282-4288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2009.04.020

Cited by

  1. Consumer’s Risk Perception and Preventive Behavior for Particulate Matter: Moderating Effects of Health Regulatory Focus vol.31, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.7856/kjcls.2020.31.3.443
  2. Youths Interests in the Biosphere and Sensitivity to Nuclear Power Technology in the UAE: With Discussions on Open Innovation and Technological Convergence in Energy and Water Sectors vol.6, pp.4, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6040180