(DB wk 9) Risk Communication and Psychosocial Impacts

In your Module 5 folder, you have 3 articles in the folder marked Additional Readings: Risk Communication. The crux of this body of reading has to do with the vital importance of Risk Communication when it comes to disaster communication. Please read at least three of these articles and highlight significant points in the Discussion Board below. If you are interested, do some further research to build on your readings. In your post, please answer the following:

1. From your reading, what is an example of how psychological distress either WAS mitigated or COULD HAVE been better mitigated via the use of effective risk communication from public officials?

2. Name a success of risk communication, if you can locate one, and alternatively, name a failure of effective risk communication (and why it was deemed a failure).

3. What lessons about effective risk communication will you carry forward in your career in emergency management?

4. Please note any other lessons that you would want to make sure to share with current and future colleagues

You will need to read the three articles + skim the CDC risk/crisis communication guide in this folder before doing your discussion board assignment on risk communication. .

This the first post from my classmate IBRAHIM need for response:

1. From your reading, what is an example of how psychological distress either WAS mitigated or COULD HAVE been better mitigated via the use of effective risk communication from public officials?

Mitigating psychological distress, and the effective and efficient response, is based on the level of awareness and mobilized efforts. Crises can instantly or slowly compromise the wellbeing of a community. Depending on the level of awareness and readiness, crises can devastate a community to even severe psychological levels. A well-planned and executed communication plan can, however, prevent adverse levels of psychological devastations, especially during the aftermath. According to CDC (n.d.), Frank Keating, the former Oklahoma Governor, helped residents of the Oklahoma City overcome the explosion of 1995 by employing quick response, and emphasizing on open and honest communication with the public. A quick, honest and open communication during a tragedy or crisis provided facts to the distressed, ensuring well-informed decisions, and offering the opportunity to anticipate and respond to possible future challenges thus, mitigating and responding to potential psychological distress (CDD, n.d.).

1. Name a success of risk communication, if you can locate one, and alternatively, name a failure of effective risk communication (and why it was deemed a failure).

A success of risk communication is evaluated based on its ability to meet the expectations. The public tends to accomplish an array of things when listening to their leaders during a crisis. As mentioned earlier in the previous section, the communication approach that help to successfully mitigate psychological distress features timeliness, openness, and honesty. Therefore, a success of risk communication would a timely, open and honest detail about a crisis, just as it happened with former Governor during the Oklahoma City explosion in 1995. A failure of a risk communication, conversely, features mixed messages from different sources, untimeliness, and the inability to counter myths and rumors about the crisis (CDC, n.d.). This was the issue with the Anthrax attacks in which miscommunication resulted in even more devastation. Different experts and communication centers, such as the Monmouth Processing and Distribution Center (PDC) and CDC, gave mixed messages about the October 18, 2001, anthrax attacks; the information could not counter rumors, offer any identification with the victims, or provide facts with which the public can mitigate psychological distress (O’Neill et al., 2007).

1. What lessons about effective risk communication will you carry forward in your career in emergency management?

I have learned quite a lot about risk communication and its role in emergency management. However, two of the most important lessons are: to always provide timely, honest and open information to my target audience, and to always ensure readiness, preparedness, and effective response through solid plans and their effective implementation. According to Schiavo (2014), communication during a crisis should be focused on helping the affected to identify with the situation, overcome their fears, and get ready and prepared for potentialities that the aftermath might prompt.

1. Please note any other lessons that you would want to make sure to share with current and future colleagues

Additionally to the previously mentioned lessons, I would want my future colleagues to understand that communication is an effective tool of response during a crisis, but only if used effectively. Just as it helped the former Governor to help his people through the tragedy of 1995, effective risk communication can save lives, and help mitigate distress. However, its ineffectiveness can also be a source of distress. The October 18, 2001, anthrax attack is an example of how miscommunication can cause confusion, slow down response, and further devastate the public. Therefore, risk communication should feature timeliness, openness, and honesty in order to achieve its purports.

References

Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (n.d.). Crisis emergency risk communication by leaders for leaders.

O’Neill, K. M., Calia, J. M., Chess, C., & Clarke, L. (2007). Miscommunication during the anthrax attacks: How events reveal organizational failures. Human Ecology Review, 14(2), 119-129.

Schiavo, R. (2014). Risk communication: Ebola and beyond. Journal of Communication in Healthcare, 7(4), 239-241.

This the second post from my classmate SAMI need for response:

1-From your reading, what is an example of how psychological distress either WAS mitigated or COULD HAVE been better mitigated via the use of effective risk communication from public officials?

Risk communication is the exchange of real-time information between experts and people facing specific threats to their health or social well-being. Public officials use risk communication to help mitigate psychological distress on people. In this case risk communication reduced psychological distress by; fostering public trust and confidence in finding the solution, promoting understanding and awareness on the issue under consideration, strengthening mutual understanding and working relationship between participants, and also promoting transparency and consistency in finding the solutio

2-Name a success of risk communication, if you can locate one, and alternatively, name a failure of effective risk communication (and why it was deemed a failure).

A success risk communication main aim is to create awareness by reaching as many people as possible affected by the situation at hand. Risk communication: Ebola and Beyond is an example of a successful risk communication because it addresses all the issues that increase the risks of Ebola spread and how the government can help solve them (Schiavo 2013). According to Cole and Fellows, the New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina is an example of the failure of effective risk communication because there was inadequate clarity, credibility, and failure to have a consensus communication (Cole & Fellows 2008).

3-What lessons about effective risk communication will you carry forward in your career in emergency management?

Effective risk communication will help in handling emergency or any other everyday social situations in the future. Some lessons that may make it useful to do that are. When perceiving risk the brain can’t process information the same way in a normal situation, it is not a personal problem but brain function which happens automatically, and risk communication will help tailor our message in a way that other people will understand when they are in such a situation. Communicating in a way that informs the audience on the situation and also calming them is not an easy task, effective risk communication helps tailor the message to the audience in a way that they will be able to interpret correctly.

4-Please note any other lessons that you would want to make sure to share with current and future colleagues

Providing accurate and meaningful information are the main goals of risk communication, practical risk communication lessons would help other people in ways like; help to exchange information on the attitudes, perceptions, and knowledge of interested parties concerning risks associated with a shared threat. Effective risk communication will also help to strengthen working relationships between colleagues, t will also improve the relationship between different colleagues.

Reference

Schiavo, R. (2013). Health communication: From theory to practice (Vol. 217). John Wiley & Sons.

Cole, T. W., & Fellows, K. L. (2008). Risk communication failure: A case study of New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina. Southern Communication Journal, 73(3), 211-228.

This the third post from my classmate ALI need for response:

Mitigating Psychological Distress

Expressing empathy is one of the preferred approaches to mitigating psychological distress during risk communication. Public officials should have the capability to put themselves into the shoes of other people. In other words, empathy enables those mandated to communicate risk messages to understand what other people feel about a disaster. It is, however, vital to clarify that empathy does not require public officials to feel or copy what communities are feeling. Those who communicate messages do not have to agree with the feelings of other people as well (Reynolds, Hall, Vanderford, & Wolfson, 2004). Officials, therefore, express empathy by describing how other individuals are feeling. Hence, spokespersons can prevent psychological anguish by speaking from their hearts and relating to the circumstances of fellow human beings. This means that representatives who communicate messages should not perceive communities as casualties or victims, but people who need emotional encouragement. Generally, officials should let communities know that they understand their situation. Overall, empathy allows disaster victims to settle their minds and focus on recovery (Reynolds et al., 2004).

A Success and Failure of Risk Communication

Successful communication of risk messages should overlook or fight stigmatization. Community members in Chinatown, New York, for instance, were able to fight stigmatization in disseminating risk messages. Community health centers released information to fight possible discrimination towards the Chinese. Fighting rumors is one of the ways to mitigate unnecessary anxiety and psychological distress (Eichelberger, 2007). On the other hand, stigmatization and spreading rumors can fail risk communication. In Chinatown, for example, the media and other sources of communication stigmatized the Chinese as the primary source of SARS (Eichelberger, 2007). The news media speculated that SARS was a national outbreak while there was no evidence (Eichelberger, 2007). The failure to counter rumors instantly can jeopardize risk communication. The spread of false information is the source of panic and anxiety among communities (Reynolds et al., 2004).

Lessons about Effective Risk Communication

The readings presented three essential lessons to enhance the field of emergency management. Firstly, relevant authorities should avoid stigma. The Internet and other outlets of the news media are useful in disseminating messages. However, emergency responders should not tolerate misinformation and bias that can jeopardize their duties. Mainly, journalists have the responsibility of distributing accurate data to support emergency managers (Eichelberger, 2007). Secondly, emergency managers should have access to accurate information. Lack of data is one of the leading causes of panic and fear during disease outbreaks (Eichelberger, 2007). It is, therefore, necessary for emergency responders to search and spread information to reduce anxiety. Moreover, emergency responders should remain open and honest. Evidence shows that we should not assume that we are protecting people by withholding information (Reynolds et al., 2004). Emergency managers should always be ready to provide accurate information and respond to questions.

Lessons to Share

I have two lessons to share. Firstly, it is necessary to focus on a community-centered strategy when developing and communicating messages (Schiavo, 2014). It is vital to engage with communities to understand their needs and wants before disseminating information. Secondly, it is essential to understand the cultural aspects that relate to diseases and risk behaviors. Studying culture allows officials to understand how communities respond to an illness. Culture also allows people to desist from stigmatization (Eichelberger, 2007). Labeling can shape how people respond to future disease outbreaks. Generally, it is vital to study cultures and respect the differences between people.

References

Eichelberger, L. (2007). SARS and New York’s Chinatown: the politics of risk and blame during an epidemic of fear. Social Science & Medicine, 65(6), 1284-1295.

Reynolds, B., Hall, W., Vanderford, M. L., & Wolfson, M. (2004). Crisis+ emergency risk communication by leaders for leaders. Centers of Disease Control.

Schiavo, R. (2014). Risk communication: Ebola and beyond. Journal of Communication in Healthcare. 7(4), 239-241.