No abstract

No abstract

For more information on the USGS-the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment-visit http://www.usgs.gov/ or call 1-888-ASK-USGS (1-888-275-8747).For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/.Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.Suggested citation: Perry, S.C., Blanpied, M.L., Burkett, E.R., Campbell, N.M., Carlson, A., Cox, D.A., Driedger, C.L., Eisenman, D.P., FoxGlassman, K.T., Hoffman, S., Hoffman, S.M., Jaiswal, K.S., Jones, L.M., Luco, N., Marx, S.M., McGowan, S.M., Mileti, D.S., Moschetti, M.P., Ozman, D., Pastor, E., Petersen, M.D., Porter, K.A., Ramsey, D.W., Ritchie, L.A., Fitzpatrick, J.K., Rukstales, K.S., Sellnow, T.S., Vaughon, W.L., Wald, D.J., Wald, L.A., Wein, A., and Zarcadoolas, C., 2016, Get your science used-Six guidelines to improve your products: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1419, 37 p., http://dx.doi. org/10.3133/cir1419. Executive SummaryNatural scientists, like many other experts, face challenges when communicating to people outside their fields of expertise. This is especially true when they try to communicate to those whose background, knowledge, and experience are far distant from that field of expertise. Why This Publication?At a recent workshop, experts in risk communication offered insights into the communication challenges of probabilistic hazard products, suggested tips, and shared their strategies for making products that a targeted audience can understand and use. Although the workshop was held to broaden the understanding and use of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Maps (NSHM), the workshop outcomes presented in this report can benefit anyone who develops products based on technical information. Why the Workshop?In the United States, earthquakes threaten people in 42 of the 50 States, with 16 States at high risk. The NSHM, which forecast earthquake ground shaking, are important products for earthquake loss reduction and thus are a flagship application of the earthquake hazards research done at the USGS. The seismic provisions of U.S. building codes use the NSHM to save lives, 1 U.S. Geological Survey.2 Natural Hazards Center, University of Colorado Boulder. Get Your Science Used-Six Guidelines to Improve Your Productsand to date, the main user group has been engineers. However, because the NSHM provide a broad view of earthquake ground-shaking hazard across the Nation, they have untapped value for planning, risk reduction, and education, and they have potential users as yet unreached.To expand the use and understanding of the NSHM, the USGS Science Application for Risk Reduction (SAFRR) ...

People judge the risks in their environment not only based on objective measures such as lives lost or dollars spent, but also based on their subjective perceptions of those risks. These perceptions can depend on a number of different characteristics of risk, including: how voluntarily the risk is undertaken, how immediately effects are seen, how known the risks are to scientists and to those exposed to them, how controllable those risks are, how new the risks feel, how catastrophic the effects tend to be, how likely the effects are to be fatal, and how dreaded the risk feels on a gut level. These nine characteristics of risk tend to load onto two orthogonal factors, or risk dimensions: unknown risk, and dread risk. While past research using such a psychometric approach to risk perception has established dread and unknown risk levels, as well as relative risk ratings, for a slate of 30 common technologies and activities (e.g., nuclear power, pesticides, skiing, fire fighting), most of these studies are now over three Dedication vii Chapter 1: Is Safe Enough Still Safe? An updated psychometric study of perceptions of technological risks and benefits 1

No abstract