conceptualizing risk or, does risk equal news?

7/29/2019 Conceptualizing Risk Or, Does Risk Equal News?

1/50

Conceptualizing Risk

Or, Does Risk Equal News?

Katherine E. Rowan, Ph.D.Professor of Communication, GMU

[email protected], http://communication.gmu.edu

Presentation for a

National Press Foundation Webinar

Washington, DC

January 2013
mailto:[email protected]://communication.gmu.edu/http://communication.gmu.edu/mailto:[email protected]


2/50

In General

Men view risks as less harmful than women do

Regardless of the risk

Nuclear power

Climate change

Cancer

Handguns

White males see all as less harmful than menof color and women do

Source: Finacune and associates

2


3/50

Who is Right?

Are white males more likely than othergroups to be well educated?

In general, yes.

Is that the whole story?

Risk = uncertain danger

Many factors shape the ways we view danger,

especially uncertain danger.

3


4/50

Consider

Tale of two oil spills: The British Petroleum Gulf spill in 2010

Guadalupe Dunes, 170 miles north of LA

We perceive immediate risks differently thanwe do slow-onset, gradually worsening

hazards.

Risk = hazards, physical or financial.

4


5/50

Immediate Risk, Imminent Danger

We see, hear, taste, or feel it.

Seeing fire, hearing an alarm, or tasting

something foul evokes immediate response.

But what happens when a hazard is lessimmediate? Not in our house? Across the

street?

Suppose we encounter ONE small child indistress? Suppose we encounter TWO?

Source: Paul Slovic

5


6/50

Processing Immediate Risk

6


7/50

Distant Risk in the United States

Risk Stories: Over 50 % U. S. population lives near coastlines

Sea levels are rising, land levels subsiding, storms severe.

The U. S. national debt will exceed its output (Gross

National Product) in a matter of decades. Cancer incidence increases with age; people live

longer.

Crumbling infrastructure (sewers, roads, bridges)

The number of U.S. residents educated in science,technology, engineering and math (STEM) is low.

7


8/50

Sewers, Flooding, Illness Nation-wide

Data: EPA, CDCGraphic: Washington Post

8


9/50

Consider Distant Risk

The more distant a harmemotionally andexperientiallythe harder it is to detect, care

about, and address.

Hazards like the growing national debt arehard to experience emotionallyat least for

those fortunate to have money now.

Slowly worsening hazards are hard to detect:Only experts see.

9


10/50

Newsworthiness and Risk

Immediate vs. Chronic Newtown vs. suicides throughout 2012

High Moral Outrage vs. Low Moral Outrage

Children vs. everyone else

Source: Peter Sandman

Local vs. National, Global

Our county sewers vs. sewers nationwide

News = upsetting if true?

10


11/50

Risk Perception Research

Scholars such as Paul Slovic, Peter Sandman,Elke Weber, and many others have shown

that the risks that upsetus most are often not

those most likely to kill us: Concretevs. abstract hazards

Imposedvs. chosen hazards

Unfairvs. fair hazards

Man-madevs. natural hazards

Immediate, acute vs. chronic, slow onset,

in future.11


12/50

Risk Perception and Reporting

Example:

Why less coverage of suicides by gun than

homicides by gun?

Suicides by gun outnumber homicides by gunin most years since at least 1920.

Sources: Neyfakh, 2013; Wintemute, 1987

12


13/50

Good Reporting

Evokes the brains executiveandprimitivefunctions

Taps emotion, immediate risk to get attention

Amygdala

Deepens understanding by providing context,

depth, range of perspectives

Cortex

Read reporters who explore this research:

Amanda Ripley.

13


14/50

Risk Communication Theories

Public education is the key.

Looking at number killed, hurt, ill tells the

whole story.

The media sensationalize risk.

The public wont understand complexities.

14


15/50

Incomplete Ideas Poor Communication

Officials assume they must educate the mediaand the public.

Without intending to do so, they can seem

arrogant. The public assumes officials are not competent

or do not care about them.

The public may seem uncooperative,apathetic, suspicious.

15


16/50

Instead .

Use the CAUSE model

to explore multiple perspectives

to provide thorough coverage

to explain why some solutions may work,others may not

16


17/50

CAUSE Model of Risk Communication

Lack of Confidence (in communicators)

Lack of Awareness (of danger)

Lack of Understanding (of danger)

Lack of Satisfaction (with solutions)

Lack of Enactment (of safety steps)

Five letters like the 5 Ws to promote

thoroughness. Source: Rowan.

17


18/50

Logic Underlying CAUSE

Risk communication situations beset by thefive tensions CAUSE indexes

Good risk communicators explore these

tensions

Often confidence must be earned and

relationships developed before other goalscan be achieved

Source: Rowan

18


19/50

How to use CAUSE

Think about why groups respond to risknews differently:

Lack of Confidence in sources?

Lack of Awareness of danger, of warnings?

Lack of Understanding of danger?

Lack of Satisfaction with solutions?

Lack of Enactment, action?

19


20/50

The C in CAUSE

C in CAUSE = confidence in communicators

WHO is communicating about rising sea

levels and dwindling wetlands in my coastal

community? Do local leaders trust thesecommunicators?

Publics have a right to know their choices for

managing a risk and a right to make choicesconsistent with their values (Botan).

20


21/50

Earning Confidence: Range of Sources

Key Obstacles: Selective suspicion of officials, business, non-

profits motives

Selective doubts about competence Solution for reporters: cover risk through many

lenses:

Affected parties, victims

Managers, officials

Business, nonprofits

Researchers, other nations, states

21


22/50

Before crises occur . . .

Write a Sunday piece about slow onset-hazards,high harm hazards on your beat:

Suicide rates in your state Flooding and illness

Flooding and costs for county

Crumbling bridges

Earning Confidence: Sunday Piece

22


23/50

Earning Confidence: Enhance Monitoring

Report to increase monitoring of hazards.

Report to encourage management to be

accessible.

Report local implications of hazards for

better emotional appeal and relevance.

23


24/50

The A in CAUSE

A = awareness of hazard, the warning Do they see its local, personal relevance?

Most people engage in confirmatory or

verification behavior when they hear a warning Few simply obey media messages

Most try to confirm or interpret first

Do media support verification efforts?

24


25/50

Awareness Challenge, 1

July 21, 2005 : what was being done in SWLouisiana, prior to Hurricane Katrina

Emergency directors distributing pamphlets

on evacuation Emergency directors giving talks to LionsClubs, civic associations about evacuation

August 29: 80 percent DID evacuate

Those who did not: mostly low income.

25


26/50

Source: Rogers, Wendy, et al., 2000.26

Awareness Challenge, 2


27/50

Awareness Solution, 1

27 Source: Gina Eosco, American Meteorological Society


28/50

Create Awareness, Solution, 2

Create Awareness withSimple

Unexpected

Concrete

Credible

Emotional

Stories

Make slow-onset risk as

concrete, precise, and

emotional as possible.

28


29/50

In Summary, Webinar 1

Does risk equal news? Not always, but . . . Risk stories, or stories about uncertain

danger, demand thoroughness.

Use CAUSE to identify likely tensions Explore risk from a range of perspectives

Deepen understanding by explaining the risk.

Read top risk reporters work: Leon Neyfakh, Andrew Revkin,

Amanda Ripley.

29


30/50

Awareness versus Understanding

Awareness differs from understanding

Awareness = recognize, recall

Understanding = explain, use to solveproblems

30


31/50

The U in CAUSE

Why is this risk or hazard hard to understand? Familiar concepts not well understood: cancer, risk, debt

vs. deficit, climate change, storm surge.

Complexities hard to envision: cancer incidence increases

with age; how cancers develop; why carbon dioxide levelsaffect temperature; risk of death from flu; risk of homicidevs. suicide.

Hard-to-understand because counter-intuitive: that

cancer need not be a death sentence; that many minoritiesless likely to get certain cancers but more apt to die whencancer not caught soon enough.

Source: Rowan, 1999, 2003

31


32/50

Deepen Understanding, Explain Complexities

Jim GandyWLTX

Columbia, SC

32


33/50

Deepen Understanding: Key Terms

Say what a word does NOT mean Radiation does NOT equal danger. Danger depends on the

type and amount of radiation.

Strong familial risk is NOT the same as the risk

connected to a hereditary syndrome

Say what it DOES mean

Radiation refers to energy moving through space.

Strong familial risk means more likely to develop breast

cancer than those with no family risk but less likely than

those with hereditary syndrome

33


34/50

Key Terms, 2

Give aRANGEof examples, not just one. People experience radiation from many sources

including light bulbs, the sun, radios, x-rays, cosmicrays, and nuclear weapons. The harmfulness of

radiation has to do with its type and amount ofexposure. When a doctor prescribes an x-ray, thebenefit of a clear image to help detect someproblem usually outweighs the risk of exposure tox-ray radiation.

34


35/50

Key Terms, 3

Discuss false examples to clarify a key term. Eating lots of fiber helps protect you from cancer.

Fiber is plant material that passes undigested, soapples, wheat bran, and salads all have fiber. Meat

does not, even tough meat. Dietary fiber is plantmaterial.

Source: Rowan, 1999

35


36/50

Deepen Understanding: Visuals

Try presenting riskas frequencies

rather than as

probabilities

Sources: Danziger, 2000;

also Schwartz et al., 1999

36


37/50

Deepen Understanding: Context

Detroit Free Press

About 100 children die of flu

each year (Mike Stobbe, AP)

What does that mean?

Total number of deaths fromflu for all ages

Total number of children in

United States = 74 million

Absolute Risk = 1 in740,000

Most deaths among those

notvaccinated

Boston Globe

The gun toll were ignoring:

Suicide (Leon Neyfakh)

What does that mean?

In 2010, number of gundeaths by suicide

outnumbered homicides:

19,392 suicide

11,078 homicides

Pattern the same since

1920.

37


38/50

Deepen Understanding: Address Lay Theories

People have lay theories about familiar aspectsof life: disease, sex, etc.

Research on lay theories began in physics

education

Examples of erroneous lay theories:

Since Im not sexually active, Im not at risk for cervical

cancer.

If I feel good, I do not have cancer.

If I get prostate cancer, I will die right away.

Theres no cancer in my family so I wont get it.

38


39/50

Address Lay Theories, 2

State the lay theory and acknowledge its apparentreasonableness It seems reasonable to assume that if there are no people in your

family who have cancer, your chances of getting cancer are low.

Create dissatisfaction with the lay theory Family history is one source of cancer risk, but there are other

sources. Lifestyle factors like obesity and smoking areconnected to cancer.

Explain the orthodox science

Cancer is often prevented if caught early. Since early cancersmay not cause symptoms, and since even people with no familyhistory of cancer are at risk, have frequent check ups soproblems can be caught and treated.

Sources: Rowan, 1999, 2000, 2003

39


40/50

The S in CAUSE

S (satisfaction with solutions): Sample questions: Do communities see this

problem as severe? Do they believe the problem

affects them and see themselves as capable of

solving it?

Answers: Support communities in coming to

their own consensus about theirpriorities. Tap

research on community consensus building.Source: McComas

40


41/50

Gaining Satisfaction

Research says people are satisfied when They believe the hazard is SEVERE

They believe the hazard affects THEM

They believe they CAN OVERCOME the hazard

They believe the recommended action will WORK

Source: Witte

41


42/50

The E in CAUSE

E stand for enactment

Make action easy Cut 100 calories a day, not lose 10 pounds.

Make action simple

Fill out this postcard and we will call you. Give deadline, Reduce cost

Routinize the solution, embed the behavior(Booth-Butterfield)

Make reducing the debt automatic. Make increasing coastal wetlands annual

requirement.

42


43/50

Motivating Enactment, 1

Reporters can include how I protectmyself information

Mention pre-packaged survival kits at stores

Cover neighborhoods that promote preparedness

Cover research on overcoming bad habits

43


44/50

Motivating Enactment, 2

Research shows gain-framed messages most effective

forprevention behavior

Using sun screen keeps your skin healthy.

Eating lots of fiber prevents many diseases.

Transferring money to savings automatically preventsgoing into debt.

Research shows loss-framed messages most effective

for detection behavior

By not getting a mammogram, you are failing to takeadvantage of the best step available for detecting breast

cancer.Sources: Banks, 1995; Salovey, 2002

44


45/50

In Summary, Webinar 2

Does risk equal news? Not always, but . . .

Risk stories, or stories about uncertain danger,

demand thoroughness.

Use CAUSE to identify likely tensions.

Explore risk from a range of perspectives,

especially local ones.

Deepen understanding by explaining the risk.

Read top risk reporters work: Leon Neyfakh, Andrew Revkin, Amanda Ripley.

45


46/50

ReferencesAging Infrastructure

[ASCE] American Society of Civil Engineers (2005). Report card on Americasinfrastructure. www.asce.org/files/pdf/reportcard/2005_Report_Card-Full_Report.pdf

CAUSE Model, Risk Communication, Science Communication

Akerlof, K. L., Rowan, K. E., Fitzgerald, D., & Cedeno, A. Y. (2012). Communicatingclimate projections in U. S. media: Politicization of model uncertainty. Nature ClimateChange, 2, 648-654.

Graduate Programs in Science Communication at Mason: http://communication.gmu.eduRowan, K. E., et al. (2009). Risk communication education for local emergency managers.

In R. Heath & D. OHair (Eds.),Handbook of Risk and Crisis Communication. NY:Taylor & Francis.

Rowan, K. E. (2003). Informing and explaining skills: Theory and research on informativecommunication. In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.), The Handbook ofCommunication and Social Interaction Skills. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Rowan, K. E. (1999). Effective explanation of uncertain and complex science. In S.Friedman, S. Dunwoody, & C. L. Rogers (Eds.), Communicating New and UncertainScience (pp. 201-223). Mahwah, NJ. Erlbaum.

46
http://www.asce.org/files/pdf/reportcard/2005_Report_Card-Full_Report.pdfhttp://communication.gmu.edu/http://communication.gmu.edu/http://www.asce.org/files/pdf/reportcard/2005_Report_Card-Full_Report.pdfhttp://www.asce.org/files/pdf/reportcard/2005_Report_Card-Full_Report.pdfhttp://www.asce.org/files/pdf/reportcard/2005_Report_Card-Full_Report.pdf


47/50

ReferencesClimate Change, Risk Communication, and Communicating Climate Change

Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University.www.climatechange.org. Director: Dr. Edward Maibach.

Maibach, E. W., Roser-Renouf, C., & Leiserowitz, A. (2008). Communication andmarketing as climate changeIntervention assets. American Journal of PreventiveMedicine, 35, 488-500.

[IOM] Institute of Medicine (2008). Global climate change and extreme weather events:Understanding the Contributions to Infectious Disease Management. Washington,

DC: National Academies Press.Lydersen, K. (2008, Oct. 20). Risk of disease rises with water temperatures. WashingtonPost, A08. Map, graphic use EPA,American Journal of Public Health, & CDC data.

[NOAA] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2005, March). PopulationTrends along the Coastal United States:1980-2008.

Rogers, W. et al. (2000). Safety symbol comprehension. Human Factors, 46.

Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis andrisk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. RiskAnalysis, 24, 311-322

Weber, E. U. (2007). Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-termrisk: Why global warming does not scare us yet. Climate Change, 77, 103-120.

47
http://www.climatechange.org/http://www.climatechange.org/


48/50

ReferencesCommunication and Health Psychology

Bandura, A. (2005). Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health, Education, andBehavior, 31, 143-164.

Booth-Butterfield, M. (2003). Embedded health behaviors from adolescence to adulthood.Health Communication, 15.

Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2007). Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die.New York: Random House.

Witte, K., et al. (2001). Effective Health Risk Messages. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Public Relations, Listening, Deliberating with Publics about Priorities, Preparedness

Besley, J. & McComas, K. (2005). Framing justice. Communication Theory, 15, 414-436.

Botan, C. (2006). Grand strategy, strategy and tactics in public relations. In C. Botan & V.Hazleton (Eds.), Public Relations Theory II. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

McComas, K. A., Arvai, J., & Besley, J. C. (2009). Linking public perception and

decision making through risk communication. In R. Heath & D. OHair (Eds.),Handbook of Risk and Crisis Communication. New York: Routledge.

48


49/50

ReferencesHealth Risk Communication

Banks, S., et al. (1995). The effects of message framing on mammography utilization.Health Psychology, 14, 178-184.

Booth-Butterfield, M. (2003). Embedded health behaviors from adolescence to adulthood.Health Communication, 15.

Danziger, K. (2000). How are breast and ovarian cancer inherited? From Genetic Health,www.genetichealth.com

Rowan, K. E. (2000). Mass media explanations of illness. In B. Whaley (Ed.),

Explaining illness. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Rowan, K. E. et al. (2003). The CAUSE model,Health Communication, 15, 241-254.

Salovey, P. et al. (2002). Message framing in the prevention and early detection of disease.In J. Dillard & M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA.

Schwartz, L. M., Woloshin, S., & Welch, H. G. (1999). Risk communication in clinicalpractice. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, No. 25, 124-133

Stobbe, M. (2013, Jan. 16). Risk to all ages: About 100 children die of flu each year.Detroit Free Press.

Witte, K. et al. (2001). Effective health risk messages: A step-by-step guide. ThousandOaks, CA: Sage

49
http://www.genetichealth.com/http://www.genetichealth.com/


50/50

ReferencesFirearms and Risk

Neyfakh, L. (2013, Jan. 20). The gun toll we are ignoring: Suicide. Boston Globe.Slovic, P. (2000). Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment

battlefield. IIFET 2000 Proceedings.

Wintemute, G. J. (1987). Firearms as a cause of death in the United States, 1920-1982.

Journal of Trauma, 27,532-536.

Risk Communication: Approaches and Overviews

Finucane, M. L. Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., Flynn, J., & Satterfield, T. A. (2000). Gender,race, and perceived risk: The white male effect. Health, Risk & Society, 2.

Pidgeon, N., Kasperson, R. E., & P. Slovic (Eds.), The Social Amplification of Risk.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge.

Ripley, A. (2008). The Unthinkable. New York: Crown.

Rowan, K. E. (2010), Risk, an overview. In S. H. Priest (Ed.),Encyclopedia of Scienceand Technology Communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sandman, P. (1993). Responding to Community Outrage. Fairfax, VA: AmericanIndustrial Hygiene Association.

50

conceptualizing risk or, does risk equal news?

Documents