메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
손희정 (서울대학교) 천진희 (서울대학교) 유명순 (서울대학교)
저널정보
서울대학교 보건환경연구소 보건학논집 보건학논집 제52권 제1호
발행연도
2015.3
수록면
49 - 57 (9page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Objectives: This study was purposed to find explanations of the phenomenon of which the health policy of fluoridation of water was being poorly accepted by the Korean public. For this, we explored the characteristics of news reports related to fluoridation of public water. The focus was on outrage factors which were known to cause the public higher level of risk perception than the level of scientifically measured risk.
Methods: Twenty-eight new reports were collected for contents analysis. The coding scheme of analysis was developed. Analysis domains were defined as ‘benefit’ versus ‘risk’ of fluoridation, and ‘mutual’ versus ‘oneway’ in the policy process. Sub items and corresponding questionnaire were developed adopting outrage factors. Two researchers analyzed news reported exclusively and discordances were resolved through discussions.
Results: Most of the news reports were from the local medium (67.9%). In terms of outrage factors, ‘benefit’(3.08) and ‘risk’(2.93) score were showed a little difference, while ‘oneway’(2.71) score was higher than ‘mutual’(1.43) score. This tendency (higher score of ‘oneway’) showed more apparent in the local medium than the central one. The contents of news supporting the policy showed the highest score in ‘benefit’ (4.00) whereas the opposing one showed the highest score in ‘oneway’(3.71).
Conclusion: Overall, outrage factors in the news reports were observed regarding policy process of fluoridation of water, which could be an explanation of poor acceptance. The health policy that would be increasing, therefore, the proper process and method to reach consensus of stakeholders including the public would need to be more explored.

목차

Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2016-517-001989145