Developing effective messages about potable recycled water: The importance of message structure and content

Abstract

Community opposition is a barrier to potable recycled water schemes. Effective communication strategies about such schemes are needed. Drawing on social psychological literature, two experimental studies are presented, which explore messages that improve public perceptions of potable recycled water. The Elaboration-Likelihood Model of information processing and attitude change is tested and supported. Study 1 (N 5 415) premeasured support for recycled water, and trust in government information at Time 1. Messages varied in complexity and sidedness were presented at Time 2 (3 weeks later), and support and trust were remeasured. Support increased after receiving information, provided that participants received complex rather than simple information. Trust in government was also higher after receiving information. There was tentative evidence of this in response to two-sided messages rather than one-sided messages. Initial attitudes to recycled water moderated responses to information. Those initially neutral or ambivalent responded differently to simple and one-sided messages, compared to participants with positive or negative attitudes. Study 2 (N 5 957) tested the effectiveness of information about the low relative risks, and/or benefits of potable recycled water, compared to control groups. Messages about the low risks resulted in higher support when the issue of recycled water was relevant. Messages about benefits resulted in higher perceived issue relevance, but did not translate into greater support. The results highlight the importance of understanding people's motivation to process information, and need to tailor communication to match attitudes and stage of recycled water schemes' development.

The psychology of recycled water: Factors predicting disgust and willingness to use

“…Currently, water recycling is associated with “toilet to tap” framing, and the disgust that is felt in response to that association is real and important, however, it also appears to be mutable. It is possible that receiving information messaging, regardless of how it was framed, triggered more cognitive processing for participants when considering water recycling—a finding which has been observed in other recent research considering framing effects on attitudes toward water recycling [ Price et al ., ]…”

“…Currently, water recycling is associated with “toilet to tap” framing, and the disgust that is felt in response to that association is real and important, however, it also appears to be mutable. It is possible that receiving information messaging, regardless of how it was framed, triggered more cognitive processing for participants when considering water recycling—a finding which has been observed in other recent research considering framing effects on attitudes toward water recycling [ Price et al ., ] Information for the public should include context‐specific informationWater reuse schemes vary a great deal from place to place in terms of the technology, sources of water, and uses of effluent. All of these factors will have implications for costs, public safety, and environmental impacts.…”

How Governance Regimes Shape the Implementation of Water Reuse Schemes

“…They felt that withholding information could create suspicion and undermine public trust. These conflicting opinions and expectations echo the pervasive uncertainty in the literature about, for instance, the role of information and knowledge in shaping public reactions [28], or the potential impact of providing factual information to different audiences [29].…”

Water reuse: A review of recent international contributions and an agenda for future research

“…Drawing also on the risk literature, trust is linked to fair behaviour by the proponents of the controversial activity (water reuse in this case) as well as to the provision of unbiased information on risks and benefits in the form of consultations with the community and all other stakeholders to enhance credibility (Price et al, 2015). One particularly important component of credibility and trust is professional competence.…”