Communicating COVID-19 risk changes: Signalling with words, phrases, and messages.

During COVID-19, governments issued messages to trigger action, encourage sustained behaviours (e.g., social distancing, hand hygiene), and manage system wide risk. This study examines messages issued across two stages established by the World Health Organization (WHO): (a) pre-pandemic early intervention stage and (b) within-pandemic escalation stage. In April 2020, approximately one month after COVID-19 was declared a pandemic, an experiment using a sample of 769 Australian participants was conducted. Using a between-subject design, participants assessed the way messages (curated and then expertly attributed to the two stages) were perceived and influenced behaviours. Next, it examined the power of words and phrases, selected from the same messages, for (a) their potential to signal risk, warning, and behavioural response and (b) the extent to which they reflected pandemic stages. Results showed that between the two stages, messages were differentiated by negative affect, assertiveness, and risk. Subsequently, increased negative affect, assertiveness, and risk indication increased adaptive behavioural intentions. However, increased assertiveness also increased non-adaptive behavioural intentions, though increased risk indication reduced non-adaptive behavioural intentions. Signal words and phrases, which hold potential as iconic features for biological hazard messages, showed varying performance across message stages, indicating an opportunity to improve them. Taken together, the findings contribute to academic and policy approaches for adapting communication to changing risk.

Checks and balances: a business-oriented lens on disaster management and warnings.

Small businesses are critical to community recovery from disasters. However, factors that affect outcomes (such as planning, information needs, and responses to warnings) are understudied. To address the research record's focus on policy that favours disaster mitigation rather than response, this project applied a two-phased, mixed-method approach. The first study comprised interviews with businesses to elucidate disaster planning approaches, knowledge and information needs, and current warning system adequacy. It revealed opportunities to build knowledge and add business-specific content to agency-issued warnings. The second study used an online survey to examine how disaster knowledge, planning, and experience are related to existing bushfire warnings and those modified with business-relevant content. The findings show that planning is associated with experience and knowledge but not with business-related protective action intentions. Modified messages were perceived as more effective and resulted in greater action intentions among those with bushfire experience. In sum, the paper highlights implications for small business-oriented disaster risk communication.

Trust, but verify: social media models for disaster management.

A lack of trust in the information exchanged via social media may significantly hinder decisionmaking by community members and emergency services during disasters. The need for timely information at such times, though, challenges traditional ways of establishing trust. This paper, building on a multi-year research project that combined social media data analysis and participant observation within an emergency management organisation and in-depth engagement with stakeholders across the sector, pinpoints and examines assumptions governing trust and trusting relationships in social media disaster management. It assesses three models for using social media in disaster management-information gathering, quasi-journalistic verification, and crowdsourcing-in relation to the guardianship of trust to highlight the verification process for content and source and to identify the role of power and responsibilities. The conclusions contain important implications for emergency management organisations seeking to enhance their mechanisms for incorporating user-generated information from social media sources in their disaster response efforts.

Risk Perception and the Public Acceptance of Drones.

Unmanned aircraft, or drones, are a rapidly emerging sector of the aviation industry. There has been limited substantive research, however, into the public perception and acceptance of drones. This article presents the results from two surveys of the Australian public designed to investigate (1) whether the public perceive drones to be riskier than existing manned aviation, (2) whether the terminology used to describe the technology influences public perception, and (3) what the broader concerns are that may influence public acceptance of the technology. We find that the Australian public currently hold a relatively neutral attitude toward drones. Respondents did not consider the technology to be overly unsafe, risky, beneficial, or threatening. Drones are largely viewed as being of comparable risk to that of existing manned aviation. Furthermore, terminology had a minimal effect on the perception of the risks or acceptability of the technology. The neutral response is likely due to a lack of knowledge about the technology, which was also identified as the most prevalent public concern as opposed to the risks associated with its use. Privacy, military use, and misuse (e.g., terrorism) were also significant public concerns. The results suggest that society is yet to form an opinion of drones. As public knowledge increases, the current position is likely to change. Industry communication and media coverage will likely influence the ultimate position adopted by the public, which can be difficult to change once established.