Suchergebnisse

AbstractUnderstanding factors affecting decisions by people to protect themselves, or not, is critical to designing supportive communications. Here, threat, protective‐action, and stakeholder perceptions were evaluated for effects on mainland Americans' behavioral intentions regarding Zika in April 2017, as postulated by the Protective Action Decision Model. Although all three perception types (including a novel resource sufficiency measure) affected intentions, these relationships varied widely depending upon the method used to measure adoption of actions (e.g., total count of all behaviors adopted vs. behavior‐specific analyses), the behaviors involved, and whether analysis focused on the full sample or only on people who had a reasonable opportunity to enact the behavior or who believed it relevant to their lives. There was a general contrast between mosquito control actions (removal of mosquito breeding areas and pesticide spraying) and travel‐related behaviors (avoiding travel to areas of local transmission of the virus, protecting oneself from mosquito bites after potential exposure, and practicing safe sex after potential exposure). Reported action or inaction during the 2016 mosquito season, and stages of behavior change, were both elicited in January–February 2017; both drove intentions in April 2017 for the upcoming season, although direct and indirect effects varied widely. Collectively these findings present theoretical, measurement, and practical implications for understanding, tracking, and promoting voluntary protective actions against hazards.

AbstractRisk analysis and hazard management can prompt varied intra‐scientific disputes, some which have or will become public, and thus potentially available for lay judgments of the relative validity of the positions taken. As attentive laypeople may include elites as well as the general public, understanding whether and how cues to credibility of disputing groups of scientists might shape those lay judgments can be important. Relevant literatures from philosophy, social studies of science, risk analysis, and elsewhere have identified potential cues, but not tested their absolute or relative effects. Two experiments with U.S. online panel members tested multiple cues (e.g., credentials, experience, majority opinions, research quality) across topics varying in familiarity subject to actual intra‐science disputes (dark matter, marijuana, sea‐level rise). If cues supported a position, laypeople were more likely to choose it as relatively more valid, with information quality, majority "vote," experience, and degree source as the strongest, and interest, demographic, and values similarity as the weakest, cues. These results were similar in overall rankings to those from implicit rankings of cue reliability ratings from an earlier U.S. online survey. Proposed moderators were generally nonsignificant, but topic familiarity and subjective topic knowledge tended to reduce cue effects. Further research to confirm and extend these findings can inform both theory about citizen engagement with scientific and risk disputes, and practice in communication about science and risk.

AbstractTwo 2017 experiments with a U.S. national opportunity sample tested effects of location, psychological distance (PD), and exposure to location‐related information on Americans' Zika risk views and behavioral intentions. Location—distance from mosquito transmission of the virus in Florida and Texas; residence within states with 100+ Zika infections; residence within potential mosquito vector ranges—had small, inconsistent effects. Hazard proximity weakly enhanced personal risk judgments and concern about Zika transmission locally. It also increased psychological proximity, and intentions of mosquito control, avoiding travel to Zika‐infected areas, and practicing safe sex. PD—particularly social and geographical distance, followed by temporal distance, with few effects for uncertainty—modestly and inconsistently decreased risk views and intentions. Exposure to location‐related information from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website—naming states with 100+ Zika cases; maps of potential mosquito vector habitat—increased risk views and psychological closeness, but not intentions; maps had slightly stronger if inconsistent effects versus prevalence information. Structural equation modeling (SEM) of a location > PD > risk views > intention path explained modest variance in intentions. This varied in degree and kind (e.g., which location measures were significant) across behaviors, and between pre‐ and postinformation exposure analyses. These results suggest need for both theoretical and measurement advances regarding effects of location and PD on risk views and behavior. PD mediates location effects on risk views. Online background information, like that used here, will not enhance protective behavior without explicitly focused communication and perhaps higher objective risk.

The deliberately provocative theme of this article is that perceived difficulties in climate change communication (CCC)—e.g., indifference about or denial of climate change's reality, negative consequences, anthropogenic causes, or need to mitigate or adapt to it—are partly the fault of climate change communicators. Fischhoff's model of risk communication development is used to demonstrate that CCC to date has tended to stress persuasion, rather than social movement mobilization or deliberation, and with a focus on the model's early stages. Later stages are not necessarily better, but a more diverse strategy seems superior to a focus perhaps narrowed by empathic, ideological, psychological, and resource constraints. Furthermore, even within persuasion, emphasizing a wider set of values, consequences, and audiences could be fruitful. Social movement mobilization has its own set of weaknesses, but usefully complements persuasion with a focus on developing power, subverting mainstream assumptions, and engaging people in collective action. Deliberation similarly has its drawbacks, but unlike the other two approaches does not define the solution—or even, necessarily, the problem—in advance, and thus offers the chance for people of contending viewpoints to jointly develop concepts and action agendas hitherto unimagined. Simultaneous pursuit of all three strategies can to some degree offset their respective flaws, at the potential cost of diffusion of energies and contradictory messages. Success in CCC is by no means guaranteed by a more diverse set of strategies and self‐reflection by communicators, but their pursuit should better reveal CCC's limits.

Communication about air pollution can help reduce health risks, but a scattered, largely qualitative literature on air pollution beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors raises questions about its effectiveness. A telephone survey of Paterson, New Jersey (USA) residents tested four hypotheses aimed toward integrating these findings. Self‐reported sheltering indoors during high pollution, the recommended strategy, was predicted by perceived air quality and self‐reported "sensitivity" to air pollution. Nearly a quarter of the sample reported mandatory outdoor activity (e.g., work) that might increase their exposures, but this factor did not significantly affect self‐reported sheltering. Perceptions of air quality did not correlate strongly with official monitoring data (U.S. Air Quality Index (AQI)); even people who regularly sought AQI data relied upon sensory cues to high pollution, and secondarily upon health cues. Use of sensory and health cues, definitions of what makes someone sensitive to air pollution, and (less strongly) definitions of vulnerability to air pollution varied widely. The minority aware of the AQI were more likely to seek it if they had illnesses or saw themselves in the targeted AQI audience, yet less likely if they believed themselves sensitive to pollution. However, their sense of the AQI's match to their own experience was driven by whether they used sensory (yes) or health (no) cues, not by illness status. Some urban residents might not have access to AQI data, but this barrier seems outweighed by need to bridge interpretive gaps over definitions of air pollution, sensory perception, vulnerability, and health consequences.

A globalizing world increases immigration between nations, raising the question of how acculturation (or its lack) of immigrants and their descendants to host societies affects risk perceptions. A survey of Paterson, New Jersey, residents tested acculturation's associations with attitudes to air pollution and its management, and knowledge of and self‐reported behaviors concerning air pollution. Linguistic and temporal proxy measures for acculturation were independent variables along with ethnicity, plus controls for gender, age, education, and income in multivariate analyses. About one‐fifth of contrasts between non‐Hispanic whites, non‐Hispanic blacks, English‐interviewed Hispanics, and Spanish‐interviewed Hispanics were statistically significant (Bonferroni‐corrected) and of medium or higher affect size, with most featuring the Spanish‐interviewed Hispanics. Knowledge variables featured the most significant differences. Specifically, Spanish‐interviewed Hispanics reported less concern, familiarity with pollution, recognition of high pollution, and vigorous outdoor activity, and greater belief that government overregulates pollution than English‐interviewed Hispanics (and than the other two groups on most of these variables too). English‐interviewed Hispanics did not differ from non‐Hispanic whites, but did on several variables from non‐Hispanic blacks. Temporal proxies of acculturation among the foreign‐born were far less significant, but concern and familiarity with air pollution increased with time spent in the United States, while belief in overregulation and a positive trend in New Jersey pollution increased with time in the nation of origin. Implications of these acculturation and ethnicity findings for risk perception/communication research and practice are discussed.

The "intuitive detection theorists" model of trust posits greater trust for correctly distinguishing danger from safety and an activist response under uncertainty about danger. An American sample evaluated U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) performance after two possible terrorism events in which DHS has the same activist or nonactivist response bias. Outcomes were two successes (bombing prevented or lack of threat accurately foretold), two failures (bombing or DHS action against high school prank leads to student deaths), or a mix. Hindsight empathy (a belief one would have made the same decision) differed across treatments but trust less so; contrary to a similar one‐event experiment in Germany, an active but incorrect response did not raise trust relative to passive incorrect action. Political conservatives were much more trusting and empathetic than liberals, and all ideological groups (including moderates) exhibited little internal variation reflecting experimental conditions. Consistently accurate outcomes rated significantly higher in empathy than either inconsistent results or consistent inaccuracy (the lowest rated); trust exhibited no significant differences. Results in this study show actual (experimentally manipulated) performance being trumped by the interpretive screen of political ideology, but this seemed less the case in the earlier German study, despite its finding of a strong moderating effect of right‐wing authoritarianism. Trust scholars need to attend more to effects of performance history (i.e., a sequence of events) and their limiting factors. More systematic testing of effects of ideology and performance history would enhance future research on trust.

Government agencies often compare contaminant levels to standards and other regulatory benchmarks to convey relative risk to public audiences, as well as for enforcement. Yet we know little of how citizens interpret these risk indicators or factors influencing interpretations. Owners of private residential wells in New Jersey were surveyed by mail. A majority appreciated this comparison, trusted the standard, and could effectively compare the contaminant level to the standard. Most people who recalled that their own well water quality was unsatisfactory simply installed treatment systems. However, there was also a surprising amount of inability to tell whether pollution levels were better or worse than the standard, perhaps exacerbated by confusing institutional language to summarize the comparison (e.g., pollution "exceeds" or is "less than" the standard) and innumeracy. There was also substantial skepticism about the degree to which pollution levels below, or (to a lesser extent) above, the standard are harmless or harmful, respectively. Skepticism was variously due to distrust of standards, disbelief in thresholds for health effects, inability to accurately compare standards and contaminant levels, information processing, and demographics. Discontinuity in reactions below versus above the standard did not exist in the aggregate, and rarely among individuals, contrary to some previous findings. At identical standards and contaminant levels, familiar toxins (mercury, arsenic, lead) elicited higher risk ratings than less familiar ones. Given the wide institutional use of this risk indicator, further research on how to improve the design and use of this indicator, and consideration of alternatives, is warranted.

Understanding of risk views in multiethnic societies and in a globalizing world may be enhanced by use of measures of ethnic identity and acculturation. Ethnic identity includes such attributes as positive attitudes about one's ethnic group and a sense of belonging to it, voluntary and frequent association with other ethnic group members, and ethnic practices (preferred music, food, language; attendance at ethnic festivities). Acculturation is absorption of the "host" society's cultural norms, beliefs, attitudes and behavior patterns by immigrants, or by other groups historically excluded from the larger society. Both generic and ethnicity‐specific measures of these concepts are available in the literature. This Perspective reviews the literature on risk implications of these concepts, how the nature of these measures presents both opportunities and challenges to risk researchers, and the degree to which ethnic identity and acculturation may be correlated with sociodemographic factors. Conceptual and methodological suggestions are made for risk research using these concepts, and hypotheses are offered about what such research might find.