RESUMO
Background: Effective biosecurity communication of transmission risks and associated protective behaviors can reduce the impacts of infectious diseases in US animal agriculture. Yet, more than 1/5 of animal production workers speak a language other than English at home, and more than 40 percent are less than fluent in English. Communicating with these workers often involves translating into their primary languages. However, communication strategies targeting different cultural groups are not well-understood. Aims: To identify cross-linguistic risk communication strategies to facilitate compliance, we hypothesized that uncertainty avoidance cultures associated with the languages might affect biosecurity compliance contingent upon two additional covariates: (1) the risk of acquiring an infection and (2) the delivery method of the infection risk. Methods: We designed an experimental game simulating a line of separation (LOS) biosecurity tactic in a swine production facility, where participants were tasked with completing tasks inside and outside of the facility. Data were collected using games in the two most spoken languages in the US: English (EN) and Spanish (SP). Participants made binary decisions about whether to use the LOS biosecurity tactic based on the risk information provided. Mixed-effect logistic models were used to test the effects of covariates on using the LOS tactic by different language groups. Results: We found that biosecurity compliance rates of participants who took the experiments in the language associated with high and low uncertainty cultures showed no significant differences. However, there are substantial differences in how risk information is perceived between the two language groups under different infection risks. Specifically, and counterintuitively, SP participants were more risk-averse in gain scenarios but more risk-taking in loss scenarios. These differences are most pronounced in numeric risk messaging, indicating that numbers may not be the best way to communicate risk information regarding biosecurity cross-culturally. Conclusions: When confronted with situational biosecurity decisions, risk perception and preferences vary by language group. Effective biosecurity communication needs to account for these differences and not assume that direct translation of risk messages will result in comparable compliance.
RESUMO
Understanding the impact of human behavior on the spread of disease is critical in mitigating outbreak severity. We designed an experimental game that emulated worker decision-making in a swine facility during an outbreak. In order to combat contamination, the simulation features a line-of-separation biosecurity protocol. Participants are provided disease severity information and can choose whether or not to comply with a shower protocol. Each simulated decision carried the potential for either an economic cost or an opportunity cost, both of which affected their potential real-world earnings. Participants must weigh the risk infection vs. an opportunity cost associated with compliance. Participants then completed a multiple price list (MPL) risk assessment survey. The survey uses a context-free, paired-lottery approach in which one of two options may be selected, with varying probabilities of a high and low risk payouts. We compared game response data to MPL risk assessment. Game risk was calculated using the normalized frequency of biosecurity compliance. Three predominant strategies were identified: risk averse participants who had the highest rate of compliance; risk tolerant participants who had the lowest compliance rate; and opportunists who adapted their strategy depending on disease risk. These findings were compared to the proportion of risk averse choices observed within the MPL and were classified into 3 categories: risk averse, risk tolerant and neutral. We found weak positive correlation between risk measured in our experimental game compared to the MPL. However, risk averse classified participants in the MPL tended to comply with the biosecurity protocol more often than those classified as risk tolerant. We also found that the behavioral risk clusters and categorization via the MPL were significantly, yet weakly associated. Overall, behavioral distributions were skewed toward more risk averse choices in both the MPL and game. However, the MPL risk assessment wasn't a strong predictor for observed game behavior. This may indicate that MPL risk aversion metrics might not be sufficient to capture these simulated, situational risk aversion behaviors. Experimental games have a large potential for expanding upon traditional survey instruments by immersing participants in a complex decision mechanism, and capturing dynamic and evolving behavioral signals.
