RISK COMMUNICATIONAPPLICATIONS  and IMPLICATIONS<br />Joseph Wojtecki<br />Center for Risk Communication<br />
RISK COMMUNICATION<br />A SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH FOR COMMUNICATING EFFECTIVELY IN<br />EMOTIONALLY CHARGED,<br />HIGH STRE...
RISK COMMUNICATION<br />Goal:<br />Informed support <br />Resistance<br />3<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<b...
Risk Communication Premise:High Stress Changes the Rules<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />
RISK COMMUNICATION SHIFTS<br />Some reasons high stress changes the rules:<br />People want to know that you care before t...
RISK COMMUNICATION<br />100<br />0<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.o...
RISK COMMUNICATION<br />20%<br />100<br />0<br />Mental noise reduces the ability<br />to process communication <br />on a...
RISK COMMUNICATION<br /><ul><li>Applications:
Message content
Messenger characteristics
Channel effectiveness</li></ul>PerceptionManagement<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />8<br />Contact: Cent...
PERCEPTIONS<br />Perception  =  Reality<br />Perception  ≠  Reality<br />What is perceived as real is real in its conseque...
Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />PERCEPTIONS <br /><ul><li>Facts alone are insufficient to address public stre...
Less than 5% of public stress and concern is driven by facts.
More than 95% of public stress and concern is driven by perception factors.</li></ul>Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.o...
Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />PERCEPTIONS <br />RISK<br />Flying<br />Toxic waste<br />Fires<br />Pesticide...
PERCEPTIONS <br />RISK<br />Flying<br />Toxic waste<br />Fires<br />Pesticides<br />Air pollution<br />Murder<br />Driving...
Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />PERCEPTIONS(OUTRAGE FACTORS)<br />Lower Perceived Risk<br />Trustworthy sourc...
PERCEPTIONS(OUTRAGE FACTORS)<br />Lower Perceived Risk<br />Not memorable<br />Moral / ethical<br />Clear non-verbal signa...
PERCEPTIONS<br />Trust<br />Benefit & Control<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />Contact: CenterforRiskComm...
Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />PERCEPTIONS<br />Risk information from a trusted source is more acceptable th...
DISCUSSION<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />
RISK COMMUNICATION<br />Applications:<br />Message content<br />Messenger characteristics<br />Channel effectiveness<br />...
MESSAGE CONTENT<br />“Critical Criteria”<br />Concise—Limited number of messages <br />Clear—Simple language<br />Brief—Ti...
Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />MESSAGE CONTENT<br />Concise<br />3 key messages -- maximum<br />7 to 12 word...
Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />MESSAGE CONTENT<br />Clear<br />6th to 8th grade reading level<br />Simple co...
MESSAGE CONTENT<br />Brief<br />T1<br />Start<br />T2<br />Limits on Attention Span<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunicati...
Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />MESSAGE CONTENT<br />Brief<br />Presentations - 10-15 minutes<br />Responses ...
Positive<br />1N = 3P<br />Avoid negative language<br />Avoid repeating negatives<br />MESSAGE CONTENT<br />Contact: Cente...
Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />MESSAGE CONTENT<br />Words to Avoid<br /><ul><li>No
Not (can’t/don’t)
Never
Nothing
None</li></ul>Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />
Message Map<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />Contact: CenterforRiskCommunication.org<br />
Area of Concern<br />How goes the war?<br />Message Map<br />Circa 47 BC<br />Key Message 1<br />I came<br />Key Message 3...
Mountains were high
Valleys were deep</li></ul>SF1<br />The enemy’s armies were large<br /><ul><li>There were more troops than reported
Their numbers stretched to the horizon
More were arriving every day</li></ul>SF1<br />We engaged the enemy forthwith<br /><ul><li>We attacked at dawn
We had the element of surprise
We found them in disarray</li></ul>SF2<br />We suffered heavy loses along the way<br /><ul><li>Many troops fell ill
Many  were injured
Food and water grew scarce</li></ul>SF2<br />They were well armed and equipped<br /><ul><li>They had the newest weapons
Every man was fully armed
They were re-supplied daily</li></ul>SF2<br />Our legions fought bravely<br /><ul><li>Our troops advanced steadily
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Basic Risk Communication

374

Published on

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
374
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
15
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Basic Risk Communication

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

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×