Social and Personal Factors as Predictors of Earthquake Preparation: The Role of Support Provision, Network Discussion, Negative Affect, Age, and Education1

Abstract

Panel data collected in 1991 as part of the University of Southern California Longitudinal Study of Generations (LSOG) were used to predict reported preparation activities prior to and in response to the 1994 Northridge, California, earthquake. In late 1994 and early 1995, 163 panelists (representing 107 multigenerational families) were interviewed by phone about their earthquake experiences. The best 1991 predictor of pre‐quake preparation was the extent of instrumental support respondents provided to network members. Earthquake preparation activities undertaken after the quake were associated with the amount and cost of damage experienced during the quake, 1991 neuroticism scores, age (inversely), and having preparedness encouraged by multiple network sources. The results highlight the importance of social roles (e.g., support provision) and discussion by informal network sources in the adoption of public health and safety messages.

Perception of the risk of tsunami in a context of high-level risk assessment and management: the case of the fjord Lyngen in Norway

“…This denial is considered, like fatalism, as a form of "non-protective response" to the threat, enabling us, like protective responses, to reduce the degree of threat appraisal (Grothmann and Reusswig 2006). For example, people living in regions exposed to seismic threat will deny or minimise this to calm their anxiety or because they feel unable to do anything to deal with it (Heller et al 2005). The responses obtained in Lyngen are also doubtless consistent with this theory.…”

The social psychology of seismic hazard adjustment: re-evaluating the international literature

“…Informal discussion of earthquake topics, attendance at community earthquake preparedness meetings and the presence of strong and long-lasting ties to the community were all significant predictors of adjustment in the Turner et al (1986) surveys. Further support for this hypothesis comes from Heller et al (2005) who found that in families where helping behaviour was common-place, higher levels of hazardrelated discussion predicted adoption of seismic mitigation adjustments. These results suggest that social networks have an effect on seismic adjustment adoption; dense, durable and pro-social community ties promote rapid and strong norm enforcement, as well as ample opportunity for observational learning, both of which steer people towards making seismic adjustments.…”

“…Older people are less likely to see earthquakes as a risk when compared with younger people (Dooley et al, 1992;Farley, 1998;Heller et al, 2005;Lai and Tao, 2003;Palm, 1998;Rüstemli and Karanci, 1999;Simpson-Housley and Curtis, 1983;Spittal et al, 2008;Turner et al, 1986). This runs contrary to a number of results from studies on risk perception of other safety hazards (e.g., Dosman et al, 2001;Kraus et al, 1992).…”

Reducing seismic risk by understanding its cultural roots: Inference from an Italian case history

“…Panel data collected in I991 as part of the University of Southern California Longitudinal Study of Generations (LSOG) were used to predict reported preparation activities prior to and in response to the 1994 Northridge, California, earthquake. With regard to earthquake preparation activity, the results highlight that actual preparation practices depend more on interpersonal factors, such as the frequency with which earthquake preparation is encouraged or discouraged by network members [34]. While media messages are important sources of information about what needs to be done, organizing informal networks for action follow-ups has been found to be an important step in promoting and reinforcing adoption of new behaviours.…”