|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
PAPERBACK PDF BOOK Free Resources |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
IMPROVING
RISK
COMMUNICATION
Committee on Risk Perception and C
· ~
. ommun~cat~on
Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Resources
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C. 1989
OCR for page R2
National Academy Press · 2101 Constitution Avenue N.W. · Washington D. C. 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the
Governing Board of the National Researeh Council, whose members are drawn
from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy
of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee
responsible for the report were chosen for their special eompetences and with
regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according
to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members
of the National Aeademy of Seienees, the National Aeademy of Engineering,
and the Institute of Medieine.
The study reported here was supported by the Ageney for Toxie Substanees
Disease Registry, Allied-Signal, Ameriean Cyanamid Company, Ameriean In-
dustrial Health Council, Ameriean Petroleum Institute, Bristol-Myers Com-
pany, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Energy, Dow Chemieal
USA, Eleetrie Power Researeh Institute, U.S. Environmental Proteetion Agency,
Exxon Corporation, Hereules Incorporated, ILSI Risk Seienee Institute, Mobil
Oil Corporation, Monsanto Company, Motor Vehicle Manufaeturers Assoeiation,
and National Scienee Foundation. It also has received support from the National
Research Council Fund, a pool of private, discretionary, nonfederal funds that
is used to support a program of Academy-initiated studies of national issues in
which science and technology figure significantly. The NRC Fund consists of
contributions from a consortium of private foundations including the Carnegie
Corporation of New York, the Charles E. Culpeper Foundation, the William
and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MaeArthur Foun-
dation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and
the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation; and the Aeademy Industry Program, which
seeks annual contributions from companies that are concerned with the health
of U.S. science and technology and with public policy issues with technological
content.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Improving Risk Communieation / Committee on Risk Perception and Commu-
nication, Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematies, and Resourees,
Commission on Behavioral and SoeiaI Seiences and Edueation, Na-
tional Research Council.
p. cm.
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
ISBN 0-309-03946-0. ISBN 0-309-03943-6 (pbk.).
1. Risk Communieation. I. National Researeh Council (U.S.). Committee
on Risk Perception and Communieation.
T10.68.I47 1989 89-9464
363.1-dc20 CIP
Copyright A) 1989 by the National Academy of Scienees
No part of this book may be reproduced by any mechanical, photographic,
or electronic process, or in the form of a phonographic recording, nor may
it be stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, or otherwise copied for public
or private use, without written permission from the publisher, except for the
purposes of official use by the U.S. government.
Printed in the United States of America
First Printing, August 1989
Second Printing, January 1990
Third Printing, March 1990
Forth Printing, June 1990
Fifth Printing, July 1994
Sixth Printing, March 1996
Seventh Printing, 1998
OCR for page R3
COMMITTEE ON RISE PERCEPTION
AND COMMUNICATION
JOHN F. AHEARNE, Vice President, Resources for the Euture,
Washington, D.C., Chairman
ERNESTA BALLARD, Consultant, Seattle, Washington
RUTH FADEN, Professor, Department of Health Policy and
Management, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
JAMES A. FAY, Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
BARUCH FISCHHOFF, Professor, Department of Engineering and
Public Policy and Department of Social and Decision Sciences
Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
THOMAS P. GRUMBLY, President, Clean Sites, Inc., Alexandria,
Virginia
PETER BARTON MUTT, Partner, Covington & Burling,
Washington, D.C.
BRUCE W. KARRH, Vice President, Safety, Health &
Environmental Affairs, E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.,
Wilmington, Delaware
D. WARNER NORTH, Principal, Decision Focus, Inc., Los Altos,
California; Consulting Professor, Department of
Engineering-Economic Systems, and Associate Director, Center
for Risk Analysis, Stanford University, Stanford, California
JOANN E. RODGERS, Deputy Director of Public Affairs and
Director of Media Relations, The Johns Hopkins Medical
Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland
MILTON RUSSELL, Professor of Economics, University of
Tennessee, Knoxville, and Senior Economist, Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
ROBERT SANGEORGE, Vice President for Public Affairs, National
Audubon Society, New York
HARVEY M. SAPOLSKY, Professor of Public Policy and
Organization, Political Science Department, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge
JURGEN SCHMANDT, Professor, LB] School of Public Affairs,
University of Texas, Austin, and Director, Center for Growth
Studies, Houston Area Research Center, The Woodlands, Texas
MICHAEL SCHUDSON, Chair, Department of Communication, and
Professor, Department of Sociology, University of California at
San Diego, La JolIa
· ..
111
OCR for page R4
PERCY H. TANNENBAUM, Professor of Public Policy and Director,
Survey Research Center, University of California at Berkeley
DETLOF VON WINTERFELDT, Director, Risk Communication
Laboratory, and Professor, Department of Systems Science,
Institute of Safety and Systems Management, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles
CHRIS WHIPPLE, Technical Manager, Electric Power Research
Institute, Palo Alto, California
SUSAN D. WILTSHIRE, Senior Associate, OK Associates, Hamilton,
Massachusetts
Staff
ROB COPPOCK
NANCY A . C RO WELL
LAWRENCE E. MCCRAY
PAUL STERN
DEBORAH REISCHMAN
1V.
OCR for page R5
COMMISSION ON BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL
SCIENCES AND EDUCATION
RoBERT MCC. ADAMS, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, D.C., Chairman
PHILIP E. CONVERSE, Institute for Social Research, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor
ARTHUR S. GOLDBERGER, Department of Economics, University
of Wisconsin, Madison
BEATRIX A. HAMBURG, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine, New York
LEONID HURWICZ, Department of Economics, University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis
JOSEPH B. KADANE, Department of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon
University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
EDWARD O. LAUMANN, Department of Sociology, University of
Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
ALVIN M. LIBERMAN, Haskins Laboratories, New Haven,
Connecticut
STEWART MACAULAY, School of Law, UniversitY of Wisconsin.
Madison
~,
ROGER G. NOLL, Department of Economics, Stanford University,
Stanford, California
SAMUEL PRESTON, Population Studies Center, University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
FRANKLIN D. RAINES, hazards Freres & Co., New York
LAUREN B- ~
A. RESNICK, Learning Research and Development
Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
JOHN M. ROBERTS, Department of Anthropology, University of
Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
ELEANOR B. SHELDON, New York
JEROME E. SINGER, Department of Medical Psychology,
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Bethesda, Maryland
MARSHALL S. SMITH, School of Education, Stanford University,
Stanford, California
JOHN A. SWETS, Bolt, Beranek & Newman Laboratories, Inc.,
Cambridge, Massachusetts
SIDNEY VERBA, University Library, Harvard University,
Cambridge, Massachusetts
P. BRETT HAMMOND, Acting Executive Director
v
OCR for page R6
COMMISSION ON PHYSICAL SCIENCES,
MATHEMATICS, AND RESOURCES
NORMAN HACKERMAN, Robert A. Welch Foundation, Houston,
Texas, Chairman
GEORGE F. CARRIER, Division of Applied Sciences, Harvard
University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
HERBERT D. DOAN, The Dow Chemical Company (retired),
MicIland, Michigan
PETER S. EAGLESON, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge
DEAN E. EASTMAN, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center,
Yorktown Heights, New York
MARYE ANNE FOX, Department of Chemistry, University of
Texas, Austin
GERHART FRIEDLANDER, Brookhaven National Laboratory,
Upton, New York
LAWRENCE W. FUNKHOUSER, Chevron Corporation (retired),
Atherton, California
PHILLIP A. GRIFFITHS, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
CHRISTOPHER F. MCKEE, Department of Physics, University of
California at Berkeley
JACK E. OLIVER, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
JEREMIAH P. OSTRIKER, Department of Astrophysical Science,
Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
FRANK L. PARKER, Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
DENIS J. PRAGER, MacArthur Foundation, Chicago, Illinois
DAVID M. RAUP, Department of Geophysical Sciences, University
of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
RICHARD ]. REED, Department of Atmospheric Sciences,
University of Washington, Seattle
ROY F. SCHWITTERS, EG&G, Inc., Wellesley, Massachusetts
ROBERT E. SIEVERS, Department of Chemistry, University of
Colorado, Boulder
LEON T. SILVER, Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences,
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
LARRY L. SMARR, Department of Astronomy and Physics,
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
EDWARD C . STONE, JR., Division of Physics, Mathematics, and
Astronomy, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
V1
OCR for page R7
KARL K. TUREKIAN, Department of Geology and Geophysics,
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
RAPHAEL G. KASPER, Executive Director
LAWRENCE E . MC C RAY, A ssociate Executive Director (untiT
August 1, 1988)
MYRON UMAN, Associate Executive Director (as of August 1, 1988)
V11
· .
OCR for page R8
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating
society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research,
dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for
the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the
Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the
federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Frank Press is
president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the
charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of out-
standing engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of
its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility
for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also
sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages
education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers.
Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy
of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions
in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public.
The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of
Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government
and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and
education. Dr. Samuel 0. Thier is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was established by the National Academy
of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology
with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and of advising the
federal government. The Council operates in accordance with general policies
determined by the Academy under the authority of its congressional charter
of 1863, which establishes the Academy as a private, nonprofit, self-governing
membership corporation. The Council has become the principal operating
agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of
Engineering in the conduct of their services to the government, the public, and
the scientific and engineering communities. It is administered jointly by both
Academies and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Engineering
and the Institute of Medicine were established in 1964 and 1970, respectively,
under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences.
· · ~
van
OCR for page R9
Preface
In 1983 the National Research Council completed a study on
managing risk, leading to a report Risk Assessment in the Federal
Government: Managing the Process. This report focused on im-
proving risk assessment and risk decisions within the government.
However, a major element in risk management in a democratic so-
ciety is communication about risk. Growing concern that risk com-
munication was becoming a major problem led to the chartering
of a National Research Council committee to examine possibilities
for improving social and personal choices on technological issues by
improving risk communication.
The National Research Council initiated the study out of recog-
nition that technological issues, in addition to being critically im-
portant, are complex, difficult, and laden with political controversy.
Because the issues are scientific and technical in content, and cut
across the concerns of many government agencies, scientific disci-
plines, and sectors of society, the National Research Council seemed
to provide an ideal forum for the conduct of such a study. Moreover,
in past work on policy in the areas of risk assessment and risk man-
agement (notably, the above-mentioned report on risk assessment),
the National Research Council has helped develop concepts widely
used in thinking about the policy issues.
It became evident in discussions with representatives of some
key federal agencies that no single agency was willing to undertake
1X
OCR for page R10
x
PREFA CB
the needed study on its own or even to act as the primary source of
support for a study at the National Research Council, even though
representatives of several agencies recognized the importance of risk
communication to their activities. As a result, the National Research
Council initiated the study with its own funds, eventually receiving
support for about half the cost from a consortium of federal and
private sources.
To reflect the breadth of issues to be studied, the Committee on
Risk Perception and Communication was made responsible to two
major units of the National Research Council, the Commission on
Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Resources and the Commission
on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. The committee
represents a cross section of many relevant kinds of experience and
expertise. It includes members with extensive experience analyzing,
managing, and communicating about diverse risks, including those
from radiation, chemicals, drugs, disease, and consumer products.
Members have experience in diverse settings, including federal and
local decision-making bodies, industry, the mass media, and envi-
ronmental and citizens' groups. The committee also exhibits diverse
disciplinary backgrounds, including physical and social sciences, law,
journalism, public health, and communications research. The Na-
tional Research Council has tried in constituting the committee to
achieve a balance of perspectives on all these dimensions.
The committee's charge was to offer knowledge-based advice to
governments, private and nonprofit sector organizations, and con-
cerned citizens about the process of risk communication, about the
content of risk messages, and about ways to improve risk commu-
nication in the service of public understanding and better-informed
individual and social choice. This report does not provide a set of
prescriptional guidelines, a "how-to" manual for risk communicators.
The committee concluded that many participants in the process lack
fundamental understanding of the important points that form the
basis for successful risk communication. Therefore this report con-
centrates on developing those points. The committee believes that
without such understanding detailed guidelines would not be useful.
With such understanding, organizations should be able to develop
their own guidelines to fit their own somewhat unique functions.
Committee members met six times during the period from May
1987 to June 1988. The committee sought knowledge from several
OCR for page R11
PREFACE
X1
sources: experimental research on processes of perception, cogni-
tion, and understanding in individuals, including studies of the un-
derstanding of risk estimates; laboratory and field research on the
conditions affecting the effectiveness of communications; and the col-
lected experience of individuals and organizations that have engaged
in organized communication about risk. The committee discussed a
wide range of hazards, including but by no means restricted to those
posed by toxic and carcinogenic substances and by radioactivity. It
considered communication both about social choices, such as whether
or how strictly to regulate hazardous substances or processes, and
about personal choices, such as whether to change eating habits to
avoid cancer or sexual habits to avoid AIDS. And the committee
considered addressing advice to several audiences, including public
agencies at all levels of government; legislatures; firms and industrial
associations; environmental, consumer, and citizens' groups; journal-
ists and mass media organizations; scientists and the organizations
that employ them; and the interested public.
This report presents the insights of the committee. The report
should significantly improve the understanding of what the problems
are in risk communication, particularly the risk communication ac-
tivities of government and industry. The committee's recornmenda-
tions, if followed, would significantly improve the risk communication
process.
JOHN F. AHEARNE, Chairman
Committee on Risk Perception
and Communication
OCR for page R12
OCR for page R13
Acknowledgments
Although this report represents the work of the comrn~ttee, it
would not have been produced without the support of professional
staff from the National Research Council, who drafted the chapters
and refined them on the basis of the committee's discussions and con-
clusions: Paul Stern (Chapters 1 through 4), Rob Coppock (Chap-
ters 5 and 6), and Lawrence McCray (Chapter 7~. Their resumes are
included with those of the committee because of their intellectual
contributions, which advanced the committee's efforts throughout
the study. The report was greatly improved by the diligent work
of its editor, Roseanne Price. In addition, invaluable support was
provided by Deborah Reischman for the first half of the committee's
tenure and Nancy Crowell for the second half.
The committee acknowledges with appreciation presentations
made at committee meetings by the following persons:
FREDERICK W. ALLEN, Associate Director, Office of Policy
Analysis, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
BETSY ANcKER-JoHNsoN, Vice President, General Motors
Corporation
GERALD L. BARKDOLL, Associate Comrn~ssioner for Planning and
Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Food and Drug Administration
RICHARD BAXTER, Senior Vice President, The Roper Organization
· ..
x~n
OCR for page R14
XIV
A CKNO BLED GMENTS
DON BERRETH, Director, Office of Public Affairs, Centers for
Disease Control
D. CHRISTOPHER CATHCART, Associate Director for Health and
Safety, Chemical Manufacturers Association
JOAN CLAYBROOK, President, Public Citizen
DEVRA DAVIS, Director, Board on Environmental Studies and
Toxicology, National Research Council
ANN FISHER, Manager, Risk Communications Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
LOWELL HARMISON, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services
NANCY HOLLAND, Executive Director, American Blood
Commission
THOMAS H. ISAACS, Deputy Associate Director, Office of Geologic
Repositories, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EDWARD KLEIN, Director, TOSCA Assistance Office, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
ANTHoNY Z. ROISMAN, Cohen, Milstein & Hausfeld, Washington,
D.C.
BEN C. RUSCHE, Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste
Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
CHRISTINE RUSSELL, Alicia Patterson Foundation Fellow (on leave
from The Washington Post) and President, National
Association of Science Writers
LINDA SMITH, former Executive Committee member, STOP IT,
Warren, Massachusetts
ROGER STRELOW, Vice President, Corporate Environmental
Programs, General Electric Company
LEE M. THOMAS, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
OCR for page R15
Contents
SUMMARY . .
A New Perspective, 1
Common Misconceptions About Risk Communication, 3
Problems of Risk Communication, 4
Conclusions and Recommendations, 8
1 INTRODUCTION
The New Interest in "Risk Communication," 16
A New Definition of Risk Communication, 19
Risk Messages as Part of the Risk Communication
Process, 23
Successful Risk Communication, 26
Notes, 29
2 UNDERSTANDING HAZARDS AND RISES.
Toward Quantification of Hazards, 31
Knowledge Needed for Risk Decisions, 33
Gaps and Uncertainties in Knowledge, 38
xv
. . 14
.............. 30
OCR for page R16
XVI
CONTENTS
Scientific Judgment and Errors in Judgment, 44
Influences of Human Values on Knowledge About Risk, 47
Implications for Risk Communication, 52
Notes, 53
3 CONFLICT ABOUT HAZARDS AND RISES 54
Is Risk Increasing or Decreasing?, 54
Changes in the Nature of Hazards and in Knowledge
About Them, 57
Changes in U.S. Society, 62
Politicization of the Technological Debate, 64
Implications of Conflict for Communication, 68
Notes, 71
4 PURPOSES OF RISE COMMUNICATION AND
RISE MESSAGES.............................................
Settings of Risk Communication, 72
Information and Influence: The Purposes of Risk
Messages, 80
Use of Influence Techniques in Risk Communication, 85
Notes, 93
5 COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT RISE
COMMUNICATION .......................................
Expectations Regarding Risk Communication, 95
Beliefs About the Functioning of the Process, 100
Stereotypes About Intermediaries and Recipients, 102
Note, 107
6 PROBLEMS OF RISE COMMUNICATION
Problems Deriving from the Institutional and Political
System, 108
Problems of Risk Communicators and Recipients, 117
Summary, 142
Note, 142
72
. . . 94
108
OCR for page R17
CONTENTS
7 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVING RISK
COMMUNICATION .........................................
XV11
143
Management of the Process, 149
The Content of Risk Messages, 165
A Consumer's Guide to Risk and Risk Communication, 176
Research Needs, 179
APPENDIXES
A Background Information on Committee Members and
Professional Staff, 185
B Bibliography, 193
C Risk: A Guide to Controversy, 211
Baruch Fischhoff
D Availability of Working Papers, 320
E Key Terms and Distinctions, 321
INDEX . .
323
OCR for page R18
OCR for page R19
IMPROVING
RISK
COMMUNICATION
OCR for page R20
