Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Emergency communication: A framework for planning and targeting messages

Kenneth A. Lachlan, PhD, Patric R. Spence, PhD

Abstract


This article outlines a model of emergency communication for use in generating action in audience members. The model expands previous research by enlarging the framework of fear and self-efficacy. The model is first outlined explaining its theoretical dimensions and if followed by explanations of its validation. The next portion discusses its potential use for emergency practitioners. The article concludes with a description of how to use the model and where to obtain more information about the model.

Keywords


crisis communication; risk communication; hazard; outrage; Peter Sandman

Full Text:

PDF

References


Witte K: Message and conceptual confounds in fear appeals: The role of threat, fear and efficacy. South Commun J. 1992; 58: 147-155.

Heberlein TA: Some observations on alternative mechanisms for public involvement: The hearing, public opinion poll, the workshop and the quasi-experiment. Nat Resour J. 1976; 16: 197-212.

Sandman P, Weinstein ND, Hallman WK: Communications to reduce risk underestimation and overestimation. Risk Decis Policy. 1998; 3: 93-108.

Sandman P: Four kinds of risk communication. Synergist. April 2003; 26-27.

Lachlan KA, Spence PR: Hazard and outrage: Developing, validating, and testing a psychometric instrument in the aftermath of Katrina. J Appl Commun Res. 2007; 35: 109-123.

Sandman P: Risk communication: Facing public outrage. EPA J. 1987; 21-22.

Sandman P, Miller PM, Johnson BB, et al.: Agency communication, community outrage, and perception of risk: Three simulation experiments. Risk Anal. 1993; 13: 585-598.

Dillard JP, Plotnick CA, Godbold LC, et al.: The multiple affective outcomes of AIDS PSAs: Fear appeals do more than scare people. Commun Res. 1996; 23: 44-72.

Higbee KL: Fifteen years of fear arousal: Research on threat appeals: 1953-1968. Psychol Bull. 1969; 72: 426-444.

O’Keefe DJ: Persuasion: Theory and Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990.

Gregory R, Mendelsohn R: Perceived risk, dread, and benefits. Risk Anal. 1993; 13: 259-264.

Slovic P: Perception of risk. Science. 1987; 236: 280-285.

Sandman PM,Weinstein ND, Klotz ML: Public response to the risk from geological radon. J Commun. 1987; 13: 93-108.

Lachlan KA, Spence PR: Audience responses and informational needs: Considering diversity in crisis communication. In Narro A, Ferguson A (eds.): Diversity and Mass Communication: The Evidence of Impact. Southlake, TX: Fountainhead Press, 2008: 157-180.

Cope F, Richardson D: The effects of reassuring recommendations in a fear-arousing speech. Speech Monogr. 1972; 39: 148-150.

Tubbs S: Explicity versus implicit conclusions and audience commitment. Speech Monogr. 1968; 35: 14-19.

Coombs WT: Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, Managing, and Responding. London: Sage, 2007.

Seeger MW, Sellnow T, Ulmer RR: Communication and Organizational Crisis.Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003.

Witte K, Allen M: A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Educat Behav. 2000; 27: 591-615.

Witte K, Morrison K: The use of scare tactics in AIDS prevention: The case of juvenile detention and high school youth. J Appl Commun Res. 1995; 23: 128-142.

Lachlan KA, Burke JA, Spence PR, Griffin D: Risk perceptions, race, and Hurricane Katrina. Howard J Commun. 2009; 20(3).




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5055/jem.2009.0033

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Journal of Emergency Management