EPR-Public Communications L-04 Risk Perception
Description: EPR-Public Communications L-04 Risk Perception Risk perception Experience from nuclear and radiological emergencies highlights public communication as one of the most important challenges in emergency management. Sometimes, an event is not
Related Topics
Download Presentation
"EPR-Public Communications L-04 Risk Perception" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this website for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Presentation Transcript
slide1. EPR-Public Communications L-04 Risk Perception<br>
slide2. Risk perception “Experience from nuclear and radiological emergencies highlights public communication as one of the most important challenges in emergency management. Sometimes, an event is not considered an emergency to experts or responders but is perceived very differently by the general public.
Communicating effectively with the public about radiation emergencies is key to successful emergency management. It will help mitigate the risks, support the implementation of protective actions, and contribute to appeasing negative psychological impacts.”
- Communication with the Public in a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency
(EPR-Public Communications, 2012)<br>
slide3. Risk Perception “What we had done to these people was just outrageous. We had frightened them so bad, they thought they were going to die.”
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission official describing government communication during the Three Mile Island event.<br>
slide4. Public response Public risk response is a matter of perception which may seem:
‘right’ or ‘wrong’
‘rational’ or ‘irrational’
Perception is real and may result in physical, psychological, economic, and other harms.
Communication is a vital tool for mitigating these risks, regardless of the objective risk nature of such events.<br>
slide5. Public response Public thinks differently about radiation risks than experts;
Public perceives and responds to risky situations based on emotion in addition to facts. What matters most is how those facts feel;
Emotion can play a bigger role in the way people perceive risks, than reason and rational thinking.<br>
slide6. Risk perception characteristics Nuclear and radiological risks feel more frightening to the public;
Even when scientific facts show a risk is low, psychological characteristics play a big role in how people perceive the situation;
These characteristics must be acknowledged in order to effectively manage public behavior.<br>
slide7. Key characteristics Media attention
Understanding
Familiarity
Scientific certainty
History / Stigma
Onset of effects
Reversibility
Trust
Availability of information
Voluntariness
Control
Benefits Fairness of risk distribution
Nature of risk
Catastrophic potential
Personification
Personal participation
Uncertainty
Awareness
Fear
Influence on children and future generations<br>
slide8. Trust<br>
slide9. Trust More trust = influence, less trust = fear
In the communicator;
In the organization that’s supposed to protect the public (the regulator);
In the organization creating the risk (the radiological facility).<br>
slide10. Trust Key Behaviors for Trust:
Honesty, even when there is risk or mistakes have been made;
Avoid secrets;
Dialogue and respect for audience feelings must be sincere;
Avoid telling people how they should feel. That’s up to them;
Do not over-reassure. Beware the Fear of Fear.<br>
slide11. What influences trust? Key elements in trust and credibility (http://www.centerforriskcommunication.com/).<br>
slide12. Media attention<br>
slide13. Understanding<br>
slide14. Familiarity<br>
slide15. Scientific certainty<br>
slide16. History/ stigma<br>
slide17. Onset of effects<br>
slide18. Reversibility<br>
slide19. Availability of information<br>
slide20. Voluntariness<br>
slide21. Control<br>
slide22. Fairness of risk distribution<br>
slide23. Nature of risk<br>
slide24. Catastrophic potential<br>
slide25. Personification<br>
slide26. Personal participation<br>
slide27. Awareness<br>
slide28. Fear<br>
slide29. Children and future generations<br>
slide30. Key characteristics summary Media attention
Understanding
Familiarity
Scientific certainty
History / Stigma
Onset of effects
Reversibility
Trust
Availability of information
Voluntariness
Control
Benefits Fairness of risk distribution
Nature of risk
Catastrophic potential
Personification
Personal participation
Uncertainty
Awareness
Fear
Influence on children and future generations<br>
slide31. Summary The public and emergency managers think about risk differently;
Non-expert risk perception is a matter of emotion more than rational factual thinking;
These feelings are real and must be taken into account by emergency managers and PIOs.<br>
slide32. Summary Understanding emotional risk perception factors in a nuclear or radiological emergency helps communicators to express empathy and respect;
This will help build trust.<br>
slide33. Summary Building trust gives emergency responders more influence on how the public behaves, which is a vital part of maximizing public health and safety in preparing for, responding to, and recovering from nuclear and radiological emergencies.<br>
slide2. Risk perception “Experience from nuclear and radiological emergencies highlights public communication as one of the most important challenges in emergency management. Sometimes, an event is not considered an emergency to experts or responders but is perceived very differently by the general public.
Communicating effectively with the public about radiation emergencies is key to successful emergency management. It will help mitigate the risks, support the implementation of protective actions, and contribute to appeasing negative psychological impacts.”
- Communication with the Public in a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency
(EPR-Public Communications, 2012)<br>
slide3. Risk Perception “What we had done to these people was just outrageous. We had frightened them so bad, they thought they were going to die.”
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission official describing government communication during the Three Mile Island event.<br>
slide4. Public response Public risk response is a matter of perception which may seem:
‘right’ or ‘wrong’
‘rational’ or ‘irrational’
Perception is real and may result in physical, psychological, economic, and other harms.
Communication is a vital tool for mitigating these risks, regardless of the objective risk nature of such events.<br>
slide5. Public response Public thinks differently about radiation risks than experts;
Public perceives and responds to risky situations based on emotion in addition to facts. What matters most is how those facts feel;
Emotion can play a bigger role in the way people perceive risks, than reason and rational thinking.<br>
slide6. Risk perception characteristics Nuclear and radiological risks feel more frightening to the public;
Even when scientific facts show a risk is low, psychological characteristics play a big role in how people perceive the situation;
These characteristics must be acknowledged in order to effectively manage public behavior.<br>
slide7. Key characteristics Media attention
Understanding
Familiarity
Scientific certainty
History / Stigma
Onset of effects
Reversibility
Trust
Availability of information
Voluntariness
Control
Benefits Fairness of risk distribution
Nature of risk
Catastrophic potential
Personification
Personal participation
Uncertainty
Awareness
Fear
Influence on children and future generations<br>
slide8. Trust<br>
slide9. Trust More trust = influence, less trust = fear
In the communicator;
In the organization that’s supposed to protect the public (the regulator);
In the organization creating the risk (the radiological facility).<br>
slide10. Trust Key Behaviors for Trust:
Honesty, even when there is risk or mistakes have been made;
Avoid secrets;
Dialogue and respect for audience feelings must be sincere;
Avoid telling people how they should feel. That’s up to them;
Do not over-reassure. Beware the Fear of Fear.<br>
slide11. What influences trust? Key elements in trust and credibility (http://www.centerforriskcommunication.com/).<br>
slide12. Media attention<br>
slide13. Understanding<br>
slide14. Familiarity<br>
slide15. Scientific certainty<br>
slide16. History/ stigma<br>
slide17. Onset of effects<br>
slide18. Reversibility<br>
slide19. Availability of information<br>
slide20. Voluntariness<br>
slide21. Control<br>
slide22. Fairness of risk distribution<br>
slide23. Nature of risk<br>
slide24. Catastrophic potential<br>
slide25. Personification<br>
slide26. Personal participation<br>
slide27. Awareness<br>
slide28. Fear<br>
slide29. Children and future generations<br>
slide30. Key characteristics summary Media attention
Understanding
Familiarity
Scientific certainty
History / Stigma
Onset of effects
Reversibility
Trust
Availability of information
Voluntariness
Control
Benefits Fairness of risk distribution
Nature of risk
Catastrophic potential
Personification
Personal participation
Uncertainty
Awareness
Fear
Influence on children and future generations<br>
slide31. Summary The public and emergency managers think about risk differently;
Non-expert risk perception is a matter of emotion more than rational factual thinking;
These feelings are real and must be taken into account by emergency managers and PIOs.<br>
slide32. Summary Understanding emotional risk perception factors in a nuclear or radiological emergency helps communicators to express empathy and respect;
This will help build trust.<br>
slide33. Summary Building trust gives emergency responders more influence on how the public behaves, which is a vital part of maximizing public health and safety in preparing for, responding to, and recovering from nuclear and radiological emergencies.<br>