module 1 trainers guide
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
TRAINER’S GUIDETRAINER’S GUIDE
AN INTRODUCTION TO
RISK COMMUNICATION1.5 hours
1 Introduction to Module 1
Everything we do involves risk… In Module 1 we will examine how audience perception of risk drives how we conduct risk communication before, during and after a crisis. We will consider the unique features that distinguish risk communication from other communication approaches. We will introduce the view that “risk communicators” exist throughout an organization involving both formal and informal interaction with employees, networks, customers and community.
Module 1 Learner Outcomes
Upon completion of Module 1, participants will be able to:
Apply the risk communication goals to a foodborne outbreak. (Topic 1)
Describe the function of risk communication within the risk management model. (Topic 1)
Identify the factors that drive perceptions of risk. (Topic 2)
Compare and contrast communicator roles from various segments of the food system. (Topic 3)
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 1 of 24
Module 1 Overview
Introduction to Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication 5 minutes
TOPIC 1: Defining Risk Communication: What It Is & What It Isn’t 30 minutes Defining risk communication Goals and intended outcomes of risk communication Key components of risk communication Risk vs crisis communication Unpacking the message: application activity
TOPIC 2: Risk Perception: Facts & Feelings 35 minutes Risk management elements Risk = Hazard + Outrage Outrage management, precaution advocacy, crisis/emergency communication Hazard + Outrage and your organization: application activity
TOPIC 3: We’re all Risk Communicators: It Is Your Job! 15 minutes Role of the official spokesperson Food system risk communicators Formal and informal information channels
Summary of Module 1 5 minutes
Total 1.5 hours
Best Practices Introduced in Module 1
Risk and crisis communication is an ongoing process
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 2 of 24
Module 1 : An Introduction to Risk Communication 1.5 hours
# CONTENT TRAINER NOTES RESOURCES
T1.5 INTRODUCE MODULE 1: AN INTRODUCTION TO RISK COMMUNICATION
Module 1 introduces participants to definitions and concepts that serve as the foundation for sound risk communication practices.
T1.6 MODULE 1 TOPICS
1. Defining Risk Communication: What It Is &
What It Isn’t
2. Risk Perception: Facts & Feelings
3. We’re All Risk Communicators: It Is Your Job!
T1.7 MODULE 1 LEARNER OUTCOMES
Apply the risk communication goals to a catastrophic foodborne outbreak. (Topic 1)
Describe the function of risk communication within the risk management model. (Topic 2)
Identify the factors that drive perceptions of risk.
Compare and contrast communicator roles from various segments of the food system. (Topic 3)
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 3 of 24
M1 Topic One
Defining Risk Communication: What It Is and What It Isn’t30 minutes
# CONTENT TRAINER NOTES RESOURCES
T1.8 TOPIC 1: DEFINING RISK COMMUNICATION: WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT ISN’T
T1.9 USDA DEFINITION OF RISK COMMUNICATION
“An open two-way exchange of information and opinion about risk leading to better understanding and better risk management decisions. “ (1992)
Note:Another definition frequently cited is from the National Research Council:
“...an integrative process of exchange of information and opinions among individuals, groups, and institutions; often involves multiple messages about the nature of the risk or expressing concerns, opinions, or reactions to risk messages or to the legal and institutional arrangements for risk management.” (1989)
Source: USDA, 1992
#4 National Research Council. Improving risk communication
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 4 of 24
T1.10 RISK COMMUNICATION GOALS
Tailor communication so it takes into account emotional response to event
Empower audience to make informed decision-making
Prevent negative behavior (that hampers response or causes more harm) and encourage constructive responses to crisis
T1.11 Application Discussion: Present real-life message examples that
illustrate goals Ask participants to identify which risk comm
goal(s) is reflected in each message Additional message examples can be found in
the Risk Communication Clipping File slide set
Discussion Questions: Message Example #1 How does this statement take into account the
public’s emotional response? What constructive behavior is encouraged? How does the statement empower audiences to
make informed decision-making?
Risk Comm Clipping File #1
T1.12 Application Questions: Message Example #2
How does this statement take into account the public’s emotional response?
What constructive behavior is encouraged?
Risk Comm Clipping File #2
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 5 of 24
T1.13 Application Questions: Message Example #3
What goal(s) is reflected in this risk
communication message? [Ans: Takes into account emotional response]
Risk Comm Clipping File #3
T1.14 Application Questions: Message Example #4
What goal(s) is reflected in this risk communication message? [Ans: Empowers informed decision-making]
Risk Comm Clipping File #4
T1.15 Application Questions: Message Example #5 What goal(s) is reflected in this risk
communication message? [Ans: Encourages constructive action]
Risk Comm Clipping File #5
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 6 of 24
T1.16Application Questions: Message Example #6
What goal(s) is reflected in this risk communication message? [Ans: Takes into account emotional response]
Risk Comm Clipping File #6
T1.17 RISK COMMUNICATION DIFFERS FROM A TRADITIONAL COMMUNICATION APPROACH
Key Concept: Audience has a dynamic role in the risk
communication model
T1.28 COMPONENTS OF RISK COMMUNICATION Audience assessment – know the public Audience involvement – involve the public as
partners Message – information content Logistics – how you get the content; how you
get it to the audience; how you get their response back
Listening – for audience response Metamessaging – how you say it, reflects how
communicator and audience feel about event (more on metamessaging in Module 3)
Self-assessment – on-going Evaluation - lessons learned
Source: Peter Sandman
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 7 of 24
T1.19 RISK COMMUNICATION INTENDED OUTCOMES
Discussion Question:Ask participants what is NOT an intended outcome, for example: (commonly misunderstood)
Make people feel safe, less anxious, avoid panic Assure public that their fear is unwarranted
Note:Risk communication is only as good as the effectiveness to implement the plan, e.g. Katrina evacuation
T1.20 DISCIPLINES THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO RISK COMMUNICATION PRINCIPLES
Risk Communication has evolved from a number of contributing disciplines:
EPA sought help bridging the gap between “expert” and “lay” perceptions of physical hazards
Psychologists answered by studying perceptions of hazard
Philosophical and sociological work focused on culturally shaped meanings of risk
Political science looked at decision-making based on risk
Communication scholars engaged in message design research
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 8 of 24
T1.21 CRISIS COMMUNICATION IS ONE FORM OF RISK COMMUNICATION
Risk communication includes communication strategies before, during and after the event or as preparedness, response and recovery
Crisis communication serves as a response to an emergency or crisis such as a foodborne outbreak
Discussion Questions: Illustrate Risk Communication functions before and after a crisis
Pre-crisis: What types of risk communication messages are we seeing in anticipation of a pandemic outbreak? [Ans: raise awareness or fear to prompt preparedness actions]
Post-crisis: What types of risk communication messages have appeared following the E.coli –spinach outbreaks that occurred in 2006? [Ans: awareness of cross contamination hazards, properly preparing produce]
T1.22 Application Activity: Unpacking the MessagePurpose: Analyze message examples by applying concepts introduced in Topic 1.
Distribute selected “Unpacking the Message” examples to individuals or small groups
Ask participants to:1) Identify whether example was intended for use
before, during or after a crisis2) Identify intended outcome(s) of the risk
communication message Share findings with the group
Handouts: Unpacking the MessageS: #6,9,13,14,15,17,19,25
Trainer’s Resource:M1.Unpacking Message Key
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 9 of 24
T1.23 SUMMARY: WHAT RISK COMMUNICATION IS NOT
T1.24 SUMMARY: WHAT RISK COMMUNICATION IS
How we perceive risk will be considered in the next section (Topic 2)
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 10 of 24
M1 Topic Two
Risk Perception: Facts & Feelings35 minutes
# CONTENT TRAINER NOTES RESOURCES
T2.25 RISK COMMUNICATION IS A COMBINATION OF FACTS AND FEELINGS
Risk perception drives risk communication
Communicating about risk is difficult because of the way people interpret risk – an intersection of facts and feelings. Risk sets the stage for emotional issues that capture headlines.
T2.26 RISK ANALYSIS PARADIGM
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 11 of 24
T2.27 RISK COMMUNICATION IS A KEY PART OF RISK MANAGEMENT
Successful risk communication builds credibility and shared responsibility for risk management policies through involvement.
These activities are not chronological; they occur simultaneously and interactively.
T2.28 Discussion Question: What are some contemporary food issues that
represent these competing perspectives? Responses could include:
irradiated food cloned meat and milk products organic food water fluoridation pesticides imported foods transfats, etc.
T2.29 Optional Activity: U-Phoria ProjectPurpose: To demonstrate how we all interpret risk differently -- based on both subjective and objective analyses
Instructions: “Let’s examine how YOU interpret risk…”
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 12 of 24
T2.30 Present U-phoria pill’s background Next field additional questions. Give positive
answers concerning cost, approval, access, availability, etc.
When asked about the specifics concerning side effects, respond: Severe diarrhea lasting up to 24-hours
Next Step: Instruct group to stand up. “Would you take the U-Phoria pill? Stay standing if
you would you be willing to take the U-Phoria pill even if the odds of developing severe diarrhea were: 1 in 1,000,000,000 1 in 1,000,000 1 in 100,000 1 in 1,000 1 in 10
Side effects are seen with every dose!
Follow-up Discussion: Why was there a range of responses? What does this tell us about risk perception?[Ans: perceptions of risk are individualized]
T2.31 FACTORS THAT SHAPE RISK PERCEPTION
Considerations that shape perceptions of risk Hazard – something that can go wrong Probability – likelihood of it happening Consequences – implications of hazard Value – subjective evaluation of the relative
importance of what might be lost
Applying these components to U-Phoria exercise: Hazard – severe diarrhea Probability – 1 in 1 billion, etc Consequences – dehydration, etc,
embarrassment, limited mobility Value – memory boost, feelings of well-being
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 13 of 24
T2.32 RISK PERCEPTION FACTORS INVOLVE BOTH THINKING & FEELINGS
Thinking (logic) focuses on the hazard (danger) and probability (likelihood or chance) of occurring
Feelings involves fear, anger and other emotions that are evoked when considering potential consequences and value of what may be lost
T2.33 GROWING DISCONNECT BETWEEN EXPERTS & PUBLIC
Scientists’ orientation is fact-based, focused on probability
Consumers’ orientation is value-based, swayed by potential consequences
T2.34 EXAMPLE OF EXPERT – PUBLIC DISCONNECT
Example of an expert who discounts Japanese consumers’ perception of the risk of BSE (mad cow) from imported U.S. beef
Clipping File #11
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 14 of 24
T2.35 ANOTHER EXAMPLE: U.S. CONSUMER RESPONSE TO MAD COW DISEASE IN 2003
This editorial cartoon captured the nation’s response to BSE (“mad cow disease”), where scientists and public health experts characterized a very small danger given the safeguards in place, while some consumer groups and politicians raised alarms which captured media attention and fed the fear factor.
Source: Minneapolis Star Tribune, January, 2004
T2.36 PETER SANDMAN
Peter Sandman is a leading risk communication expert and member of NCFPD Risk Communication Team
This quote refers to the fact that there is virtually no correlation between what upsets you and what can harm you. Sometimes we're upset about serious risks, sometimes about silly ones.
About Peter Sandman:http://www.petersandman.com/#about
Source of quote:http://www.psandman.com/handouts/sand46.pdf
T2.37 Discussion Question: What are some food-related “risks” that upset
consumers?
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 15 of 24
T2.38 RISK = HAZARD + OUTRAGE
Hazard = danger/probabilityOutrage = fear/dread/anger
According to Sandman: Outrage is as real as hazard Both are measurable Both are manageable
#7 Sandman P. The relationship between hazard and outragehttp://www.psandman.com/handouts/sand44.pdf
T2.39 DIFFERENT RISK COMMUNICATION APPROACHES
The level of hazard and outrage determines the communication approach:
public relations precaution advocacy outrage management crisis/emergency risk communication
#4 Sandman P. Four kinds of risk communication
T2.40 OUTRAGE MANAGEMENT
Low hazard + high outrage Goal: Reduce outrage so people don’t take
unnecessary precautions
Food examples for outrage management: BSE (Mad Cow) Genetically modified foods (“Franken-foods”) Cloned animal products
Source: Peter Sandman
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 16 of 24
T2.41 PRECAUTION ADVOCACY
High hazard + Low outrage Goal: increase fear to motivate preventative
action Also described as health education or issue
management
Food examples for precaution advocacy: Salmonella in undercooked poultry Mercury in fish High fat diet Vibrio in shellfish Raw milk and cheese Undercooked ground meats
Source: Peter Sandman
T2.42 CRISIS/EMERGENCY RISK COMMUNICATION
High hazard + High outrage Goal: Acknowledge hazard, validate concern,
give people ways to respond Examples: food safety example, bioterrorism
event
Food examples for crisis or emergency risk communication:
E.coli-spinach outbreak Bioterrorism event Food recall
Source: Peter Sandman
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 17 of 24
T2.43 Optional Activity:Applying Risk = Hazard + Outrage to your OrganizationPurpose: Apply model to food-related issues within participants’ organizations
Identify issues within your organization for each of the communication approaches
What are your organization’s communication goals for each issue?
Ask for volunteers to share responses. Record on flipchart to represent range of food issues.
Handout: M1.Risk=Hazard+Outrage worksheet.doc
M1 Topic Three
We’re All Risk Communicators: It Is Your Job!15 minutes
# CONTENT TRAINER NOTES RESOURCES
T3.44 TOPIC 3: WE’RE ALL RISK COMMUNICATORS
The last topic discusses the role of the risk communicator in various segments of the food system.
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 18 of 24
T3.45 BEYOND THE SPOKESPERSON
Traditionally, risk communication is centralized in Public Information Officer (PIO) or spokesperson functions:
Industry CEO Organization or agency head Communications director Other “official spokespersons”
Discussion Question:Who are the official spokespersons in your organization?
T3.46 RISK COMMUNICATORS FROM THE FOOD SYSTEM SERVE MANY ROLES AND FUNCTIONS
Foodborne outbreaks or emergencies will usually involve these risk communicators:
They participate in press conferences, prepare statements, address public in meetings, consumer service reps, etc.
These persons should be trained in risk communication as part of an organization’s preparedness planning
Images: Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES)http://www.csrees.umd.edu/
T3.47 Food system risk communicators continued: I Images: Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES)http://www.csrees.umd.edu/
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 19 of 24
T3.48 RISK COMMUNICATORS WE OVERLOOK
Risk communication occurs in other settings as well.It is important to recognize the importance of these communicators within your organization.
Discussion Questions: What are the formal communication channels
used by your organization? What are informal information channels in your
organization?
Images: Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES)http://www.csrees.umd.edu/
T3.49 Case Study: Schwan’s Salmonella Outbreak, 1994
Case study illustrates importance of these “informal” risk communicators:
Schwan’s is a privately owned company based in Minnesota that features home delivered food products
In 1994, an estimated 224,000 persons were exposed to salmonella contaminated ice cream
Source – tanker trucks carrying ice cream premix had not been cleaned adequately
Home delivery drivers were instrumental in communicating with customers and restoring trust in Schwan’s products. [Key concept]
Discussion Questions: Who are the employees in your organization
who could serve a similar function during a food-related emergency?
#9 Sellnow, T. and R. Littlefield, eds. Lessons Learned about protecting America’s food supply
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 20 of 24
T3.50 BEST PRACTICES FOR EFFECTIVE RISK COMMUNICATION
Note: 10 Best Practices for effective Risk
Communication were identified by NCFPD Risk Communication Project collaborators.
Best practices will be highlighted at the end of each module.
Best practices principle introduced in the module: Risk and crisis communication is an ongoing
processo Implement as preparedness, response and
recovery strategieso Incorporate risk communication into the policy
development processo Continuously evaluate and update crisis
communication plans
#8 Seeger, M. Best practices in risk and crisis communication: an expert panel process
Handout:M1.T3.Risk Comm Best Practices.doc
Glossary TermsConsequences - implications of hazard
Crisis - an event that is a serious risk both in hazard terms and in outrage terms; a discrete situation that poses high-hazard high-outrage risks
Crisis and emergency communication – communication during a crisis
Danger - something that can go wrong or has uncertain consequences of potential harm
Emergency risk communication - attempt by experts to provide information to allow an individual, stakeholders, or an entire community to make the best possible decisions about their well being within nearly impossible time constraints and ultimately accept the imperfect nature of choices during a crisis… (CDCynergy)
Hazard – something that can go wrong
Issues management communication – similar to crisis communication, however, organization has advance knowledge of impending crisis and opportunity to choose the timing of the communication to stakeholders and the public and the issue and organization’s plan to resolve it (CDCynergy)
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 21 of 24
Metamessaging - all the content of crisis communications other than information content: how reassuring to be, how confident to sound, how to address emotion, etc.
Outrage - psychological reaction people have to a perceived threat, e.g. fear, anger, frustration, dread
Panic - sudden strong feeling of fear that prevents reasonable thought or action
Pre-crisis communication - communication about a possible future crisis
Probability – likelihood of it happening, based on statistics
Psychometrics - the psychological theory or technique of mental measurement
Relative risk - risk of disease among those exposed/risk among unexposed
Risk - measurement of the likelihood and consequence of something bad happening combined with our psychological reaction to it (outrage). Note: term ‘risk’ is used by most biological and medical scientists to indicate simply the likelihood and consequence of an event
Risk - probability of loss of that which we value (value-based, not knowledge-based) (Covello)
Risk analysis - A set of tools used to support rational decision-making in the face of uncertainty. Includes hazard identification, risk assessment, risk management and risk communication. Note: the term risk analysis is sometimes used as a synonym for risk assessment.
Risk communication - an integrative process of exchange of information and opinions among individuals, groups, and institutions; often involves multiple messages about the nature of the risk or expressing concerns, opinions, or reactions to risk messages or to the legal and institutional arrangements for risk management (NCR, 1989)
Discussion about an adverse outcome and probability of that outcome occurring for an individual. In some instances, risk communication has been employed to help an individual make a choice about whether or not to undergo a medical treatment, continue to live next to a nuclear plant, pass on his genetic risk, or elect to vaccinate a healthy baby against whooping cough (CDCynergy)
Risk communicator - person discussing risk formally (spokesperson) or through informal channels, e.g. employee in conversation with customer
Stakeholders - groups or individuals who have influence or are involved in the decision-making process
SMEs: Subject Matter Experts
Value – subjective evaluation of the relative importance of what might be lost
Module 1 Sources
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 22 of 24
1. Covello V and Sandman P. (2001). Risk communication: evolution and revolution. In A. Wolbarst (Ed.), Solutions to an Environment in Peril (pp. 165-178). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press. Available online: http://www.psandman.com/articles/covello.htm
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2003). Emergency Risk Communication CDCynergy. Atlanta. Available online: http://www.orau.gov/cdcynergy/erc/
3. Fischhoff, B and Downs J. (1997). Communicating foodborne disease risk. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 3 (4). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available online: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol3no4/fischof.htm)
4. National Research Council (1989). Improving risk communication. Washington D.C.:National Academy Press.
5. Sandman, P. (2003) Four kinds of risk communication. Available online: http://www.psandman.com/handouts/sand17.pdf
6. Sandman, P. (1993). Relationship between hazard and outrage. Available online: http://www.psandman.com/handouts/sand44.pdf
7. Sandman, P. (Rev 2006). Fundamentals of risk communication. Available online: http://www.psandman.com/handouts/topical.htm#four
8. Seeger, M. (2006). Best practices in risk and crisis communication: an expert panel process. Journal of Applied Communication, 34 (3). National Communication Association.
9. Sellnow, T. and R. Littlefield, eds. Lessons learned about protecting America’s food supply, Institute for Regional Studies, North Dakota
State University, Fargo, ND, 2005.
10. Slovic ,P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280-285. Available online: http://communityrisks.cornell.edu/BackgroundMaterials/Slovic-Science1987.pdf
11. World Health Organization. (2005). Outbreak communication, best practices for communicating with public during an outbreak. Report of the WHO Expert Consultation on Outbreak Communications, September 21-23, 2004, Singapore. Available online: http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO_CDS_2005_32web.pdf\
12. World Health Organization. (2005). Outbreak communication guidelines. Available online: http://www.who.int/infectious-disease news/IDdocs/whocds200528/whocds200528en.pdf
Additional Resources
Fisher, A. et al. Risk communication for industry practitioners: an annotated bibliography. Risk Communication Specialty Group, Society for Risk Analysis. McLean, VA. August, 1995. Available on line at: http://www.sra.org/rcsg/risk.pdf
Neuhauser, L. and Ereman, R. “Essentials of risk communication for public health practice.” UC Berkeley Center for Infectious Disease Preparedness, April 5, 2005. Webcast available online at: http://www.idready.org/webcast/viewwebcast.php#
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 23 of 24
Parker, Cindy. Crisis communication: how to talk to people about disasters. Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health Preparedness, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Narrated slides available online at: : http://www.jhsph.edu/preparedness/training/online/crisis_communication.html
Contributors
William Hueston, Director, Center for Animal Health and Food Safety, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, MN
Peter Sandman, Risk Communication specialist, www. psandman.com
Steven Venette, Associate Professor of Communication, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS
Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 4/10/2023 Page 24 of 24