Generating Effective Risk Messages: How Scary Should Your Risk Communication Be?

No consensus exists on how to develop effective risk messages that motivate appropriate action yet do not unduly frighten people. A useful framework for developing risk messages is the extended parallel process model (EPPM). The EPPM suggests that when people are faced with health or environmental risks, they are motivated to either control the danger or control their fear. This chapter offers a description of how the EPPM can explain public responses to risk messages, and then reports on two pilot studies that illustrate how existing audience perceptions can be used in the design and generation of effective risk management messages.

[1]  K. Witte.  Fear control and danger control: A test of the extended parallel process model (EPPM) , 1994 .

[2]  W. Cannell,et al.  Audience perspective in the communication of technological risks , 1988 .

[3]  C. Chess,et al.  Opening doors: Making risk communication agency reality , 1989 .

[4]  F. Reed Johnson,et al.  Informed Choice or Regulated Risk , 1988 .

[5]  R. W. Rogers,et al.  A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change1. , 1975, The Journal of psychology.

[6]  R. Keeney,et al.  Improving risk communication. , 1986, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[7]  H. Leventhal,et al.  Findings and Theory in the Study of Fear Communications , 1970 .

[8]  Kim Witte,et al.  Message and conceptual confounds in fear appeals: The role of threat, fear, and efficacy , 1993 .

[9]  Irving L. Janis,et al.  Effects of Fear Arousal on Attitude Change: Recent Developments in Theory and Experimental Research1 , 1967 .

[10]  K. Witte,et al.  The Role of Threat and Efficacy in AIDS Prevention , 1991, International quarterly of community health education.

[11]  L. Thomas.  Risk Communication: Why We Must Talk about Risk , 1986 .

[12]  R. Rogers.  Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: a revised theory of prote , 1983 .

[13]  R W Rogers,et al.  Fear appeals and attitude change: effects of a threat's noxiousness, probability of occurrence, and the efficacy of coping responses. , 1976, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  D. Mileti,et al.  The Causal Sequence of Risk Communication in the Parkfield Earthquake Prediction Experiment , 1992 .

[15]  R. W. Rogers,et al.  Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change , 1983 .

[16]  Baruch Fischhoff,et al.  Why Study Risk Perception , 1982 .

[17]  P. Slovic.  Perception of risk. , 1987, Science.

[18]  R W Rogers,et al.  Identifying effective components of alcohol misuse prevention programs. , 1982, Journal of studies on alcohol.

[19]  H. Kelley,et al.  Communication And Persuasion , 1953 .

[20]  Ronald W. Perry,et al.  Emergency Management Strategies for Communicating Hazard Information , 1985 .

[21]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits , 1978 .