Research Scientists
Paul Slovic, PhD
University of East Anglia
Full Oration
Full Oration for Prof. Paul Slovic by Ian Bateman
(Vice) Chancellor, ladies and gentleman,
In the book "A Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" a giant computer calculates that the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything, is 42.
Now in the book the designers of the computer are less than delighted with this puzzling answer. However, it does illuminate an important truth that, for any answer to be useful, one needs to understand its meaning and know how to use that answer in order to make better decisions.
Professor Paul Slovic has spent more than 40 years at the leading edge of research into understanding the true meaning of a host of often puzzling answers. In particular, he is generally acknowledged as the worlds leading expert on improving decision making in the area of risk.
As we all aware from the recent shocking events in London, risk is an ever present and some would say increasing facet of the world we live in. It impacts upon a huge diversity of issues and this is reflected in the variety of areas in which Paul Slovic has worked. This includes examining risks as diverse as nuclear power, HIV and AIDS, risks from smoking and from crime, environmental health risks, natural hazards, and so on.
Many of the techniques which Paul has developed to examine these issues are now the standard approaches to assessing decisions concerning risk. Similarly many of his findings are now considered so fundamental that it almost feels odd that anyone would once have thought about risk in any other way.
An early example concerns Paul's work on nuclear power. In the technological optimism which characterised the post-war period many saw nuclear power as the future of the worlds energy supply. Engineers looked at risks from a purely statistical point of view. They saw that, relative to risks such as driving, the chances of dying from nuclear melt-down were very small. However, as Paul quickly demonstrated, the public did not view all forms of risk in the same manner. Indeed some forms of death were simply considered worse than others and dread of such outcomes was considered at least as important as the statistical likelihood of them occurring.
Paul's work also showed that the degree to which people felt that they had control over a risk massively influenced its acceptability. Risks, such as those from nuclear power, which were imposed by a government were invariably less acceptable than risks, such as car driving, which were voluntarily undertaken. Similarly, the extent to which people trusted an institution greatly influenced whether the public felt a risk was acceptable or not. Also while trust took a long time to establish it could be lost very rapidly as many governments have since learned to their cost. These issues which Paul identified, of dread, control and trust, rapidly became the founding principles for a new academic discipline examining the perception of risk. In essence Paul's work showed that there was more to assessing risk than simply an expected body count.
Paul next turned his attention to the area of economics which at the time was based upon simple assumptions regarding human behaviour. These portrayed humans as calculating machines which assessed the costs and benefits of any choice. Paul showed that in reality, when faced with highly complex problems, people often resort to relatively simple rules of thumb to come up with answers.
Paul demonstrated this in one of the most famous social science experiments ever conducted. This was not carried out in the rarefied atmosphere of some university laboratory but rather in the more salubrious surroundings of a Las Vegas casino. Here Paul and his colleague Sarah Lichtenstein, presented hardened gamblers with a series of bets, each one made up of some chance of winning some cash prize. They found that, when asked to choose their favourite bet, gamblers tended to choose whichever bet had the highest chance of winning. However, when asked how much money they would pay to play different bets, the same gamblers tended to favour bets with bigger payoffs, even when this conflicted with their original choice of best bet. This result suggested a finding which again is today taken as standard; that the way in which questions are posed can change the answer which people give.
Paul's work spawned literally hundreds of studies which confirmed this result across a wide range of contexts. Why this occurs brings us to some of Paul's most recent work in which he shows that humans have two quite different ways in which they make decisions and answer questions.
The first approach is to adopt cold calculating rationality, to compare and contrast and to weigh up the costs and benefits of doing something. This is how standard economics assumes people work and indeed it does seem to be a good approximation of say how we might choose which mortgage is best for us.
However, Paul's work introduced a second approach to decision making, in which people rely not upon calculation, but upon their feelings. This emotional approach, called affect, can be very rapid. Affect is the same system which our caveman ancestors used when confronted by a sabre toothed tiger. In such a situation the caveman is up the nearest tree and wondering about the climbing abilities of Neolithic cats before the economist has finished his initial assessment of the pros and cons of an array of possible responses Ð much to the delight of the tiger!
We use affect in every aspect of our lives. When we use first impressions to select who to sit next to on the train to Norwich, or which café to visit once we arrive, then we are using affect. Indeed others go out of their way to bombard us with affective messages. Advertisers use affect every day, when they show us pictures of young attractive people happily eating yoghurt the subliminal, affective message is clear; to be young, attractive and happy eat our yoghurt! Everybody makes use of affect. We are all dressed up, some of us more unusually than others, to give out affective messages. Paul's work on affect has been described as the most significant contribution in the last decade to understanding decision making. The eminence and impact of this and his other work is reflected in a raft of international awards including several for distinguished and outstanding contributions to psychology, economics and science.
Paul has consistently used his pre-eminent position to help others and has been a long standing friend to UEA. In particular he has from its outset been influential in steering the Centre for Environmental Research in the School of Environmental Sciences. He also has well established links to a number of researchers in the areas of risk and behavioural and environmental economics. Yet it is not this but another side of his recent work on which I wish to close.
Paul is an extremely modest person, but this is an oration and so I apologise to him if he finds the following excruciating. Paul is without doubt an outstanding academic, but he is far more than that. Much of his ongoing work centres around using his skills to address real world social problems. He has a genuine concern for justice and equity in society, a sense that if we understand how people think we might be better able to shape society for the general good. This concern is reflected in his recent work supporting a number of US lawsuits against the targeting of young people by the tobacco industry. He has shown that the decision to start smoking is not, as these companies contend, the result of a well informed assessment of the enjoyment of smoking relative to its risks, but rather as the result of peer pressure mixed with a lack of comprehension of what the consequences of smoking can be. Lung cancer is simply not something that the average 16 year old understands.
Even more recently, Paul has been working to focus attention on the plight of some of the most disadvantaged people in the world. He has shown how, depending upon how a problem is presented, both the public and decision makers can either become psychologically numbed as in the case of the Darfur genocide, or highly responsive as in the case of the Indian Ocean Tsunami. Paul's work here is vital in that it highlights ways in which the will to act can be harnessed to result in action by both the general public and decision makers.
Paul has always lived a life which shows that the individual can make a difference. This was demonstrated in a highly practical way recently when, together with his wife Roz, Paul worked in Kenya building schools and working with the young and old in remote villages to improve the daily lot of ordinary people in those areas. This is work which they will be continuing next year.
This genuine interest in bettering the lives of others, combined with his academic brilliance and professional generosity has made him not only hugely respected but also enormously well liked across the profession. In preparing this oration I spoke to colleagues from around the world. A common feeling was expressed by US psychologist Ellen Peters who said that "Paul is simply the nicest person I know". But I want to close with the oration sent to me by Nobel Prizewinner Danny Kahneman who wrote:
"Paul Slovic has been at the front of several fields during an exceptionally impressive career. He has made, and continues to make, numerous seminal contributions to basic research and theory on judgment and decision making. He has also developed a unique approach to the problems of societal risk, which combines compelling empirical studies of how risks are perceived with a deep understanding of the ethical and practical issues of risk management. He is one of those rare people who can be described as a treasure for their field."
I believe that the mark of a truly great thinker is an ability to discover essential truths and be the first to observe what the following generation come to think of as the obvious. In his work on the perception of risk, the construction of preferences, affective decision making and so many other areas, Paul Slovic has consistently provided that great intellectual leadership. And so, Chancellor, Vice Chancellor, it is with great pleasure that I present to you Professor Paul Slovic for the degree of Doctor of Science honoris causa
Ian Bateman
14th July, 2005