Evaluating NASA's role in risk communication process surrounding space policy decisions

Abstract In an effort to standardize evaluations of agency communications with stakeholders, a recent NASA report outlined the need to consider metrics that could be used to measure effectiveness over time by monitoring communications output and examining the outcome of communication activities. While evaluating agency communications in this way seems straightforward, actually carrying out such an evaluation is fraught with potential problems. This is especially true of communications surrounding risky or stigmatized activities, as evaluations of this type may lead to an overemphasis on negative participant reactions and an obscuring of those areas where competent work is being done. To help avoid this, an alternative is to conduct evaluations of the process involved in creating agency communications, rather than people's reactions to the communication programs themselves. Adopting this approach de-emphasizes the supposed requirement for researchers to correlate an individual or group's behavior with comprehension or agreement with agency communications. This paper outlines 5 criteria for such a process and discusses them in the context of an evaluation of the risk communication program surrounding the Cassini mission to Saturn.