Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Basic Risk Communication
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Basic Risk Communication

343

Published on

A brief approach to Risk Communication. All materials are copyrighted and belong to the Center for Risk Communication.

A brief approach to Risk Communication. All materials are copyrighted and belong to the Center for Risk Communication.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
343
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
14
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. RISK COMMUNICATIONAPPLICATIONS and IMPLICATIONS
    Joseph Wojtecki
    Center for Risk Communication
  • 2. RISK COMMUNICATION
    A SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH FOR COMMUNICATING EFFECTIVELY IN
    EMOTIONALLY CHARGED,
    HIGH STRESS OR
    CONTROVERSIAL SITUATIONS
    (e.g., Crisis, Conflict, Change)
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 3. RISK COMMUNICATION
    Goal:
    Informed support
    Resistance
    3
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 4. Risk Communication Premise:High Stress Changes the Rules
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 5. RISK COMMUNICATION SHIFTS
    Some reasons high stress changes the rules:
    People want to know that you care before they care what you know
    People have difficulty hearing, understanding and remembering information
    People understand information at four grades below their education level
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 6. RISK COMMUNICATION
    100
    0
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 7. RISK COMMUNICATION
    20%
    100
    0
    Mental noise reduces the ability
    to process communication
    on average 80%
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 8. RISK COMMUNICATION
    • Applications:
    • 9. Message content
    • 10. Messenger characteristics
    • 11. Channel effectiveness
    PerceptionManagement
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    8
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 12. PERCEPTIONS
    Perception = Reality
    Perception ≠ Reality
    What is perceived as real is real in its consequences
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 13. Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    PERCEPTIONS
    • Facts alone are insufficient to address public stress and concern.
    • 14. Less than 5% of public stress and concern is driven by facts.
    • 15. More than 95% of public stress and concern is driven by perception factors.
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 16. Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    PERCEPTIONS
    RISK
    Flying
    Toxic waste
    Fires
    Pesticides
    Air pollution
    Murder
    Driving
    Smoking
    Poverty
    Source: ABC News
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 17. PERCEPTIONS
    RISK
    Flying
    Toxic waste
    Fires
    Pesticides
    Air pollution
    Murder
    Driving
    Smoking
    Poverty
    Source: ABC News
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    IMPACT
    1 day
    4 days
    18 days
    27 days
    61 days
    113 days
    182 days
    5 ½ years
    7 to 10 years
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 18. Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    PERCEPTIONS(OUTRAGE FACTORS)
    Lower Perceived Risk
    Trustworthy sources
    Substantial benefits
    Controllable
    Voluntary
    Fair / equitable
    Natural origin
    Familiar
    Not dreaded
    Certainty
    Children not victims
    Higher Perceived Risk
    Untrustworthy sources
    Few benefits
    Uncontrollable
    Involuntary
    Unfair / inequitable
    Human origin / man made
    Unfamiliar / exotic
    Dreaded
    Uncertainty
    Children as victims
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 19. PERCEPTIONS(OUTRAGE FACTORS)
    Lower Perceived Risk
    Not memorable
    Moral / ethical
    Clear non-verbal signals
    Responsive
    Random / scattered
    Low media coverage
    Victims as statistics
    Immediate effects
    Effects reversible
    Understood science
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Higher Perceived Risk
    Memorable
    Immoral / unethical
    Mixed non-verbal signals
    Non-responsive
    Catastrophic
    High media coverage
    Victims as people
    Delayed effects
    Effects irreversible
    Misunderstood science
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 20. PERCEPTIONS
    Trust
    Benefit & Control
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 21. Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    PERCEPTIONS
    Risk information from a trusted source is more acceptable than from one not trusted.
    Risks under personal control are more acceptable than risks controlled by others.
    Risks that carry a benefit are more acceptable than those without benefit.
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 22. DISCUSSION
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 23. RISK COMMUNICATION
    Applications:
    Message content
    Messenger characteristics
    Channel effectiveness
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    18
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 24. MESSAGE CONTENT
    “Critical Criteria”
    Concise—Limited number of messages
    Clear—Simple language
    Brief—Time limitations
    Positive—Avoid negatives
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    19
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 25. Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    MESSAGE CONTENT
    Concise
    3 key messages -- maximum
    7 to 12 words -- maximum
    3 supporting facts -- maximum
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 26. Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    MESSAGE CONTENT
    Clear
    6th to 8th grade reading level
    Simple construction
    Avoid jargon
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 27. MESSAGE CONTENT
    Brief
    T1
    Start
    T2
    Limits on Attention Span
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 28. Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    MESSAGE CONTENT
    Brief
    Presentations - 10-15 minutes
    Responses to tough questions - 2 minutes
    Soundbites - 9 seconds
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 29. Positive
    1N = 3P
    Avoid negative language
    Avoid repeating negatives
    MESSAGE CONTENT
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 30. Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    MESSAGE CONTENT
    Words to Avoid
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 35. Message Map
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 36. Area of Concern
    How goes the war?
    Message Map
    Circa 47 BC
    Key Message 1
    I came
    Key Message 3
    I conquered
    Key Message 2
    I saw
    SF1
    The journey was long and hard
    • We traveled many days
    • 37. Mountains were high
    • 38. Valleys were deep
    SF1
    The enemy’s armies were large
    • There were more troops than reported
    • 39. Their numbers stretched to the horizon
    • 40. More were arriving every day
    SF1
    We engaged the enemy forthwith
    • We attacked at dawn
    • 41. We had the element of surprise
    • 42. We found them in disarray
    SF2
    We suffered heavy loses along the way
    • Many troops fell ill
    • 43. Many were injured
    • 44. Food and water grew scarce
    SF2
    They were well armed and equipped
    • They had the newest weapons
    • 45. Every man was fully armed
    • 46. They were re-supplied daily
    SF2
    Our legions fought bravely
    • Our troops advanced steadily
    • 47. They were fearless in battle
    • 48. They were undaunted by greater numbers
    SF3
    Despite the difficulties we arrived in force
    • We had the necessary legions
    • 49. We had the necessary weapons
    • 50. Morale was high
    SF3
    The enemy is destroyed
    SF3
    They were well positioned
    • They occupied the high ground
    • 51. They were fully fortified
    • 52. They deployed advance observers
    • 53. Their troops have deserted
    • 54. They have abandoned their weapons
    • 55. The victory is ours
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 56. DISCUSSION
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 57. RISK COMMUNICATION
    Applications:
    Message content
    Messenger characteristics
    Channel effectiveness
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 58. MESSENGER CHARACTERISTICS
    People judge the messenger before they judge the message
    People judge the messenger primarily in terms of trust
    Trust is judged primarily through actions, body language and verbal communication
    Source: Center for Risk Communication
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 59. MESSENGER CHARACTERISTICS
    Competence and expertise
    Dedication and commitment
    Honesty and openness
    Caring and empathy
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 60. MESSENGER CHARACTERISTICS [LOW STRESS]
    Competence/
    Expertise
    80-85%
    All Others
    15-20%
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 61. MESSENGER CHARACTERISTICS [HIGH STRESS]
    Assessed in first
    30 seconds
    Caring/Empathy
    50%
    Competence/
    Expertise
    Dedication/
    Commitment
    15-20%
    15-20%
    Honesty/
    Openness
    15-20%
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 62. MESSENGER CHARACTERISTICS
    Non-Verbal Signals
    Low stress – 25 percent of message
    High stress - 75 percent of message
    Are intensely and quickly noticed
    Can override verbal message
    Are interpreted negatively
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 63. RECEIVER PERSPECTIVE
    Most Credible
    Least Credible
    Respected local citizens
    Non-management employees
    Educators
    Healthcare professionals
    Media
    Activist groups
    Industry officials
    Government officials
    Paid consultants
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 64. CREDIBILITY LADDERING
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 65. RECEIVER PERSPECTIVE
    Five-Step Decision Process:
    1. Awareness
    2. Interest
    3. Evaluation
    4. Social Trial
    5. Decision
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 66. RECEIVER PERSPECTIVE
    Five-Step Decision Process:
    1. Awareness
    2. Interest
    3. Evaluation
    4. Social Trial
    5. Decision
    Mass
    (Trust, Control, Benefit—Tentative Decision)
    Interpersonal
    (Self-selected credible third parties)
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 67. DISCUSSION
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 68. RISK COMMUNICATION
    Applications:
    Message content
    Messenger characteristics
    Channel effectiveness
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 69. CHANNEL EFFECTIVENESS
    Levels of Communication
    Inform(awareness – mass media)
    Involve(feedback - impersonal)
    Engage (dialogue - interpersonal)
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 70. CHANNEL EFFECTIVENESS
    Levels of Communication
    Source: Center for Risk Communication
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 71. DISCUSSION
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 72. RESISTANCE TO DECISIONS
    Decide
    Announce
    Defend
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 73. RESISTANCE TO DECISIONS
    Decide
    Announce
    Defend
    COMMUNICATION
    USUALLY ENTERS
    THE PROCESS HERE
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org
  • 74. PERCEPTIONS
    (Favorable/Unfavorable)
    Opinions
    Beliefs
    (True/False)
    (Good/Bad)
    Values
    Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org

×