What Do Lay People Want to Know About the Disposal of Nuclear Waste? A Mental Model Approach to the Design and Development of an Online Risk Communication

Abstract

Public participation requires the involvement of lay people in the decision-making processes of issues that concern them. It is currently practiced in a variety of domains, such as transport and environmental planning. Communicating risks can be a complex task, as there may be significant differences between the risk perceptions of experts and those of lay people. Among the plethora of problems that require public involvement is the site selection of a nuclear waste disposal site in the United Kingdom, which is discussed in this article. Previous ineffective attempts to locate a site provide evidence that the problem has a strong social dimension, and studies ascribe public opposition to a loss of public trust in governmental agencies and decisionmakers, and to a lack of public understanding of nuclear waste issues. Although the mental models approach has been successfully used in the effective communication of such risks as climate change, no attempt has been made to follow a prescriptive mental model approach to develop risk communication messages that inform lay people about nuclear waste disposal. After interviewing 20 lay people and 5 experts, we construct and compare their corresponding mental models to reveal any gaps and misconceptions. The mental models approach is further applied here to identify lay people's requirements regarding what they want to know about nuclear waste, and how this information should be presented so that it is easily understood. This article further describes how the mental models approach was used in the subsequent development of an online information system for the site selection of a nuclear waste repository in the United Kingdom, which is considered essential for the improvement of public understanding and the reestablishment of trust.

A "mental models" approach to the communication of subsurface hydrology and hazards

“…There is, however, a growing acknowledgment of the role and value of individual and community knowledge, not just in collecting and compiling scientific data (Lane et al, 2011) but also in improving communications by countering the expert-imposed concept of risk (Lave and Lave, 1991). One psychological approach that has been employed effectively in communicating across a range of risky and controversial geological and hydrological issues is mental models (Lave and Lave, 1991;Maceda et al, 2009;Skarlatidou et al, 2012;Wagner, 2007;Thomas et al, 2015).…”

“…The perception of risk within a two-factor space, representing public perceptions of how risky an activity was based on its familiarity and how fatal the consequences may be (Slovic, 1987, p. 98). theory, developed by Johnston-Laird (1980) as a conceptual paradigm that encompassed new ideas about language and perception in the burgeoning field of cognitive science. The theory of mental models as interpretation of theoretical reasoning has fallen from favour in psychology (Evans, 2002;Over, 2009), but it is still used in the applied sense, particularly by researchers examining decision making associated with risk, communication and education (Goel, 2007;Larson et al, 2012;Panagiotaki et al, 2009;Skarlatidou et al, 2012).…”

“…When applied to specific contexts, most notably to radioactive-waste management and carbon capture and storage (Skarlatidou et al, 2012;Vari, 2004;Wallquist et al, 2010), it was found that, in cases where the perceived risk of new technology was greater than the actual risk (or the risk designated by the expert), mental models provided a useful holistic approach to decision making, which placed equal value on the attitudes of both expert and non-expert (Vari, 2004). …”

Perceived environmental and health risks of nuclear energy in Taiwan after Fukushima nuclear disaster

“…Therefore, risk communication needs to acknowledge the differences in risk perceptions of various stakeholders/social contexts and value the point of view of lay people (Bator, 2012). A good risk communication approach also needs to incorporate stakeholder inputs and involve local people in the decision making processes of issues that concern them in order to reduce their perceived risk of NPPs (Goodfellow et al, 2011;Skarlatidou et al, 2012).…”

How do policymakers and think tank stakeholders prioritize the risks of the nuclear fuel cycle? A semantic network analysis

“…Among the existing techniques, mental modeling has been recognized as a useful framework to examine stakeholders' risk perceptions and concerns and to integrate such concerns into the risk planning process (Wood et al 2012). In addition, mental models can be used to explore the cognitive gap existing between different stakeholders groups, thus helping to facilitate intergroup communication (Morgan et al 2002;Skarlatidou, Cheng, and Haklay 2012).…”