Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Breakwell, G. M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Breakwell, G. M
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Medical Bulletin 56:110-120 (2000)
© 2000 The British Council

research-article

Risk communication: fators affecting impact

Glynis M Breakwell

Social Psychology European Research Institute, School of Human Sciences, University of Surrey Guildford, UK

Correspondence to Prof G M Breakwell, SPERI, School of Human Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH, UK

Abstract

The impact of risk communication depends upon a complex interaction between the characteristics of the audience, the source of the message, and its content. Audience perception of risk is influenced by demographic factors (e.g. age, gender), personality profile, past experience, and ideological orientation. It is also affected by cognitive biases (e.g. unrealistic optimism) and lay ‘mental models’ of the hazard For food hazards, the important dimensions of risk are controllability, novelty and naturalness. The source must be trusted for a risk message to be effective. Trust is association with believing the source is expect, unbiased, disinterested, and not sensationalising. To maximise impact, risk communication must have a content which triggers attention, achieves comphrehension and can influence decision-making. It must be unambiguous, definitive and easily interpretable - rarely achievable particularly when risk is shrouded in scientific uncertainty. Risk messages initiate social processes of amplification and attenuation, consequently their ramifications are rarely controllable.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Health Promot PractHome page
S. L. Santos, D. A. Helmer, J. Fotiades, L. Copeland, and J. D. Simon
Developing a Bioterrorism Preparedness Campaign for Veterans: Using Focus Groups to Inform Materials Development
Health Promot Pract, January 1, 2007; 8(1): 31 - 40.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Health Educ ResHome page
B. F. Piko and J. Bak
Children's perceptions of health and illness: images and lay concepts in preadolescence
Health Educ. Res., October 1, 2006; 21(5): 643 - 653.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. PsychiatryHome page
K. J. Prentice, J. M. Gold, and W. T. Carpenter Jr.
Optimistic Bias in the Perception of Personal Risk: Patterns in Schizophrenia
Am J Psychiatry, March 1, 2005; 162(3): 507 - 512.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.