Gutiérrez, VVCifuentes, LABronfman, NC2024-07-042024-07-042006-09-01JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH, Volume 9, Issue 6, Page 641-6551366-9877https://repositorio.unab.cl/handle/ria/58198INDEXACIÓN: WEB OF SCIENCE.An experiment was conducted in a real environment to test how information delivery affects risk ranking. Another aim was to propose the best format for delivering information. Different people received different types of information about risks in a risk ranking exercise: Group 1 received a descriptive paragraph about the hazards (Format 1); Group 2 added a table with specific information on risk attributes (Format 2); Group 3 added information on the steps taken locally to mitigate the risks (Format 3), and Group 4 received a data table without identifying the hazard (Format 4). Agreement among subjects' rankings within a group and from group to group was used to measure the potential impact of information delivery. Average pair-wise Spearman correlation was used to compare the level of agreement within each group. Results showed greater consensus in the group using Format 4 than in Formats 1, 2, and 3, with the only significant difference between Format 4 and each one of the others. The results show that the amount of information, and the way it is delivered, may affect how lay people rank risks, but the differences are not statistically significant.enrisk rankingrisk communicationdeveloping countryArtículoCC BY-NC-ND 4.0 ATRIBUCIÓN-NOCOMERCIAL-SINDERIVADAS 4.0 INTERNACIONAL Deed10.1080/13669870600717525