Did it appear that the risk response method selected by NASA was dependent on the risk or on other factors?
It appears that risk response of NASA was not dependent on risk but on other factors like political pressure, monetary concerns, and poor management. Facing a highly constrained budget, NASA sacrificed the research and development necessary to produce a truly reliable and reusable shuttle. Secondly, they sacrificed on fuel by using solid rocket boosters instead of safer liquid-fueled boosters because they required a much smaller research development effort. With primarily qualitative analysis of risk, the aforementioned factors appeared to have more significance at NASA.