Defining Moments in Risk Communication Research: 1996–2005

Abstract

Ten years ago, scholars suggested that risk communication was embarking on a new phase that would give increased attention to the social contexts that surround and encroach on public responses to risk information. A decade later, many researchers have answered the call, with several defining studies examining the social and psychological influences on risk communication. This article reviews risk communication research appearing in the published literature since 1996. Among studies, social trust, the social amplification of risk framework, and the affect heuristic figured prominently. Also common were studies examining the influence of risk in the mass media. Among these were content analyses of media coverage of risk, as well as investigations of possible effects resulting from coverage. The use of mental models was a dominant method for developing risk message content. Other studies examined the use of risk comparisons, narratives, and visuals in the production of risk messages. Research also examined how providing information about a risk's severity, social norms, and efficacy influenced communication behaviors and intentions to follow risk reduction measures. Methods for conducting public outreach in health risk communication rounded out the literature.

Risk communication of terrorist acts, natural disasters, and criminal violence: Comparing the processes of understanding and responding

“…For terrorism risk, in particular, there may be difficulty because of the infrequency of attacks. For instance, media coverage of the anthrax mailings has been criticized for providing inadequate information regarding who was exposed, how they were exposed, and whether antibiotics prevent anthrax (McComas, 2006).…”

Including social impact assessment in food safety governance

“…A review by McComas et al emphasised that risk involves not only objective characteristics, but also subjective judgements that may be influenced by social, cultural, and psychological factors (McComas, 2006). In fact, a failure to consider the social context of risk communication may cause the risk information to be disregarded by recipients (Frewer, 2000).…”

“…A communication approach that integrates four key elements has been recommended by Renn (2006), which involves documentation, information, dialogue and participation, in order to facilitate transparency, two-way learning, and consumer confidence. The involvement of stakeholders to evaluate the risks and benefits of food safety hazards will help establish a dialogue as well as improve consumer trust in the risk management institutions (Frewer, 2004;McComas, 2006;Walls, Rowe & Frewer, accepted for publication), given that the process is transparent and clearly publicised. Utilising a public dialogue has also been identified as important when extending risk communication beyond safety concerns to include benefits in terms of quality of life (Frewer, Howard, & Shepherd, 1996).…”

Development and evaluation of a risk-communication campaign on salmonellosis

“…One of the strategies adopted to address the public's perception of specific health risks is communication campaigns targeting the general public (Aarva, De Haes, & Visser, 1997;Fischhoff, 1995;Freimuth, Linnan, & Potter, 2000;Glik, 2007;McComas, 2006;Scott, 2003;Whittingham & Ruiter, 2008). However, though there is much literature on the public's perception of food-related hazards (Arzenton et al, 2005;Fischer, De Jong, De Jonge, Frewer, & Nauta, 2005;Fischhoff & Downs, 1997;Fischler, 2002;Frewer, Howard, Hedderly, & Shepherd, 1997;Halkier et al, 2007;Kleef et al 2006;Parry et al, 2004;Powell, 1996;Redmond & Griffith, 2003;Rohr, Lüddecke, Drusch, Müller, & Alvensleben, 2005;Rosati & Saba, 2004;Shepherd, 2008;Sparks & Shepherd, 1994), studies on the communication of food risks are still sparse (Fischer et al, 2005;Jacob, Mathiasen, & Powell, 2009;Smith, 2006; van Dijk et al, 2008), as are studies on the effectiveness of communication campaigns for improving food safety at home (Nauta et al, 2008).…”