[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v12y1992i1p27-35.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Risk Communication: Narrative vs. Technical Presentations of Information About Radon

Author

Listed:
  • Dominic Golding
  • Sheldon Krimsky
  • Alonzo Plough
Abstract
This paper reports on an experiment to test the hypothesis that people respond better to risk communication that reflects more closely the conditions of their social and cultural lives. The experiment used the case of radon to determine whether technical or narrative forms of risk communication were more effective at drawing people's attention, imparting information, and modifying behavior. Two series of articles on radon were placed in the local newspapers of two Massachusetts communities. Homeowner attitudes, knowledge, and responses were monitored in baseline and follow‐up telephone surveys. A third community was selected for comparison. The newspaper series were developed on the basis of previous research and six focus groups conducted with homeowners. The technical series presented authoritative, factual risk information, in the scientific style of the passive voice with generalized and impersonal language. The narrative series consisted of dramatized accounts of individuals making decisions about radon testing and mitigation, written in a more personal style. The findings from the focus groups confirm the results of previous studies, but the small size of the follow‐up samples was a limiting factor in drawing definitive conclusions about the relative effectiveness of the two formats. The experiment demonstrates the difficulty of any risk communication effort on radon and underscores the need for good research design. The study illustrates the need for further research on the role of sociological and cultural factors in the public perception and response to risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominic Golding & Sheldon Krimsky & Alonzo Plough, 1992. "Evaluating Risk Communication: Narrative vs. Technical Presentations of Information About Radon," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 27-35, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:12:y:1992:i:1:p:27-35
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01304.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01304.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01304.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harry Otway & Brian Wynne, 1989. "Risk Communication: Paradigm and Paradox," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(2), pages 141-145, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ian G. J. Dawson, 2018. "Assessing the Effects of Information About Global Population Growth on Risk Perceptions and Support for Mitigation and Prevention Strategies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(10), pages 2222-2241, October.
    2. Peter M. Sandman & Paul M. Miller & Branden B. Johnson & Neil D. Weinstein, 1993. "Agency Communication, Community Outrage, and Perception of Risk: Three Simulation Experiments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(6), pages 585-598, December.
    3. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.
    4. Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Ree M. Meertens & Wim F. Passchier & Nanne K. DeVries, 2007. "How Does the General Public Evaluate Risk Information? The Impact of Associations with Other Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 715-727, June.
    5. Ian G. J. Dawson & Johnnie E. V. Johnson & Michelle A. Luke, 2013. "Helping Individuals to Understand Synergistic Risks: An Assessment of Message Contents Depicting Mechanistic and Probabilistic Concepts," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(5), pages 851-865, May.
    6. Ricketts, Mitch & Shanteau, James & McSpadden, Breeanna & Fernandez-Medina, Kristen M., 2010. "Using stories to battle unintentional injuries: Narratives in safety and health communication," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1441-1449, May.
    7. Branden B. Johnson, 2004. "Varying Risk Comparison Elements: Effects on Public Reactions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1), pages 103-114, February.
    8. María-Cruz Negreira-Rey & Jorge Vázquez-Herrero & Tania Forja-Pena, 2024. "Radon Risk Communication through News Stories: A Multi-Perspective Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(10), pages 1-16, September.
    9. Wouter Poortinga & Karin Bronstering & Simon Lannon, 2011. "Awareness and Perceptions of the Risks of Exposure to Indoor Radon: A Population‐Based Approach to Evaluate a Radon Awareness and Testing Campaign in England and Wales," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(11), pages 1800-1812, November.
    10. Heather Lazrus & Rebecca E. Morss & Julie L. Demuth & Jeffrey K. Lazo & Ann Bostrom, 2016. "“Know What to Do If You Encounter a Flash Flood”: Mental Models Analysis for Improving Flash Flood Risk Communication and Public Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 411-427, February.
    11. Thomas Webler & Horst Rakel & Ortwin Renn & Branden Johnson, 1995. "Eliciting and Classifying Concerns: A Methodological Critique," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 421-436, June.
    12. Yang, Y. & Hobbs, J., 2018. "Information Framing Effects in Biotechnology Communication A Comparison between Logical-scientific and Narrative Information," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277010, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Hutchings, Siobhan, 2024. "Individuals perceptions of electric vehicles and related policy : Findings from an online experiment," Warwick-Monash Economics Student Papers 74, Warwick Monash Economics Student Papers.
    14. Liliana Cori & Olivia Curzio & Gabriele Donzelli & Elisa Bustaffa & Fabrizio Bianchi, 2022. "A Systematic Review of Radon Risk Perception, Awareness, and Knowledge: Risk Communication Options," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-27, August.
    15. Joseph Steinhardt & Michael A. Shapiro, 2015. "Framing Effects in Narrative and Non‐Narrative Risk Messages," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(8), pages 1423-1436, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jerry V. Mitchell, 1992. "Perception of Risk and Credibility at Toxic Sites," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 19-26, March.
    2. Branden B. Johnson, 1993. "Coping with Paradoxes of Risk Communication: Observations and Suggestions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 241-243, June.
    3. Bruna De Marchi, 1991. "The Seveso Directive: An Italian Pilot Study in Enabling Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), pages 207-215, June.
    4. Joanna Burger & Michael Gochfeld, 1991. "Fishing a Superfund Site: Dissonance and Risk Perception of Environmental Hazards by Fishermen in Puerto Rico," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), pages 269-277, June.
    5. Yu Lei & Guirong Zhang & Xiuping Liao & Wei Feng, 2023. "Information Delayering Safety Management (IDSM): A New Method of System Safety in Urgent Situations Needs to Be Established," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-18, February.
    6. Ilyas Baker & Thawatchai Boonchote, 1998. "Sensitizing technical experts to public concerns about industrial hazards using theory, guided imaging and focused group discussion," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 39-45, March.
    7. Joanna Burger & Kerry Kirk Pflugh & Lynette Lurig & Leigh Ann Von Hagen & Stanley Von Hagen, 1999. "Fishing in Urban New Jersey: Ethnicity Affects Information Sources, Pe ception, and Compliance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 217-229, April.
    8. B. Jon Klauenberg & Erik K. Vermulen, 1994. "Role for Risk Communication in Closing Military Waste Sites," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 351-356, June.
    9. Joseé CM. Van Eijndhoven & Rob A.P.M. Weterings & Cor W. Worrell & Joop de Boer & Joop van der Pligt & Pieter‐Jan M. Stallen, 1994. "Risk Communication in The Netherlands: The Monitored Introduction of the EC “Post‐Seveso” Directive," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 87-96, February.
    10. Harry Otway & Aniello Amendola, 1989. "Major Hazard Information Policy in the European Community: Implications for Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 505-512, December.
    11. Seymour J. Garte, 1990. "Communication of Relative Carcinogenic Risks: A Quantitative Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 467-468, December.
    12. Åsa Boholm, 2019. "Risk Communication as Government Agency Organizational Practice," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(8), pages 1695-1707, August.
    13. Jerry Busby, 2008. "Analyzing Complicity in Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1571-1582, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:12:y:1992:i:1:p:27-35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.