Risk perception and communication

Public health depends on laypeople’s ability to understand the health-related choices that they and their societies face. The study of risk perception examines that ability. The study of risk communication examines the processes that determine how well communications help (or hinder) their recipients. Although focused on decisions involving risk, such research necessarily considers potential benefits as well, if only the benefits that come from reducing risks (e.g. through medical treatments, lifestyle changes, or improved air quality). Communication is a two-way process. Without listening to people, it is impossible to understand what they know and value, as a foundation for providing relevant information in a comprehensible form. Here, we draw on basic research in decision science (behavioural decision research) to inform the specific challenges faced by public health researchers and practitioners. This chapter seeks to help experts help laypeople make wise health choices.

Contribution of Risk Perception and Communication in Aviation Safety Events

Although effective risk management during operations relies on risk perception and risk communication, the aviation industry has not systematically considered the contribution of these two constructs to safety events. This study analyzed a representative sample of safety investigation reports (1) to identify the degree to which risk perception and communication and their factors have been influential overall and across various flight operation stages of investigated events, and (2) to examine whether their contribution has changed with time. The analysis of 140 reports showed environmental factors affected risk communication and perception most frequently, whereas emotional and physiological factors were found in the sample with very low frequencies. Also, risk communication and perception and their factors did not appear with the same frequency across the various flight stages, and a few variations were observed over time. The aviation industry could consider the results of this study to steer its efforts toward mitigating the adverse effects of factors related to ineffective risk perception and communication. This could include the inclusion of respective factors in safety reporting schemes, investigation methods and analyses and, possibly, a tailored approach to the various flight stages and targeted risk literacy interventions.

The Effect of Climate Change Semantic Expressions on Perceptions and Attitudes Towards Decarbonisation

This paper is proposed to clarify the effectiveness of semantic expressions used to designate climate change in France context, i.e. “réchauffement climatique” (“global warming”); “changement climatique” (“climate change”); and “derangement climatique” (“climate imbalance”). An experimental study (sample size N = 126) based on ‘linguistic semantics’ approach is conducted in order to assess the effect of these expressions on concerns, perceptions risk and sensitivity regarding Climate Change (CC). Our results show that the expression “réchauffement climatique” (“global warming”) is the most appropriate from a statistical standpoint. It increased the importance of the problem (salience of this issue) relative to other societal issues (e.g. unemployment, social justice, crime, etc.); it also enhanced participants' sensitivity (respondents' emotions associated with CC) more than the other expressions. We can still note however a strong difference in impact among the expressions if we were to calculate their impact on the basis of risk perception and communication objective. Results showed that when focusing our communication campaigns on nature, it would be preferable to use the term “changement” ("change"), when focusing our communication on social level, it would be preferable to use the term “réchauffement” ("warming"), whereas the term “dérèglement” ("imbalance") becomes the most suitable in seeking to build a communication campaign focusing on economic aspects. Semantics therefore should be selected depending on the communication objective.