Skip Navigation


Annals of Occupational Hygiene Advance Access originally published online on August 26, 2005
Annals of Occupational Hygiene 2005 49(8):703-709; doi:10.1093/annhyg/mei033
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
49/8/703    most recent
mei033v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by NIEUWENHUIJSEN, M. J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by NIEUWENHUIJSEN, M. J
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© 2005 British Occupational Hygiene Society Published by Oxford University Press


Original Article

Exposure Misclassification of Household Pesticides and Risk Perception and Behaviour

MARK J NIEUWENHUIJSEN1,*, CHARLOTTE N B GREY1, JEAN GOLDING2 and THE ALSPAC GROUP

1 Department of Environmental Science and Technology, Imperial College, London, UK; 2 ALSPAC, Bristol University

* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel: +44 20 7594 6384; fax: +44 20 7594 9266; e-mail: m.nieuwenhuijsen{at}imperial.ac.uk

The aim of this paper was to compare self-reported household pesticide use or non-use in a questionnaire with reported household pesticide use from an in-depth interview, in order to elucidate any differences, and to study any differential reporting of pesticides. In the in-depth interview we asked for pesticide use, behaviour adopted while using pesticides and risk perceptions as possible factors to explain the reporting of pesticide use. The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) was used as the sampling frame. Eight hundred and thirty one parents filled out and returned the questionnaire. A random sample of 53 users and 94 non-users took part in the interview. Almost 90% of the 94 who did not report the use of pesticides in the questionnaire reported the use of pesticides during the interview. However, those who reported pesticide use in the questionnaire were more likely to report home and garden pesticide use (P < 0.05) in the interview. The parents who reported pesticide use in the questionnaire had a tendency to perceive a lower risk and higher benefit from pesticide use, and tended to be less risk averse when compared with the groups of parents who reported no pesticide use. They bought the pesticides because ‘they looked safe’, while those who did not report pesticide use bought them because they ‘used them before’. The latter were also more likely to state that they did not understand everything on the label and that they thought that it did not provide all the information needed. They were also less likely to feel that they knew what they are doing when using pesticides and felt that pesticide use is relatively dangerous compared with other hazards. In conclusion, pesticide use is underreported in questionnaires, and behaviour and risk perception may affect the reporting.

Keywords: children • exposure misclassification • pesticides • risk perception


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ANN OCCUP HYGHome page
T. OGDEN
Annals of Occupational Hygiene at Volume 50: Many Achievements, a Few Mistakes, and an Interesting Future
Ann. Hyg., November 1, 2006; 50(8): 751 - 764.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.