M1-Intro-to-Risk-Comm-GUIDE-1-20-07

TRAINER’S GUIDE AN INTRODUCTION TO RISK COMMUNICATION 1.5 hours Introduction to Module Everything we involves risk… In Module we will examine how audience perception of risk drives how we conduct risk communication before, during and after a crisis We will consider the unique features that distinguish risk communication from other communication approaches We will introduce the view that “risk communicators” exist throughout an organization involving both formal and informal interaction with employees, networks, customers and community Module Learner Outcomes Upon completion of Module 1, participants will be able to:  Apply the risk communication goals to a foodborne outbreak (Topic 1)  Describe the function of risk communication within the risk management model (Topic 1)  Identify the factors that drive perceptions of risk (Topic 2)  Compare and contrast communicator roles from various segments of the food system (Topic 3) Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page of 24 Module Overview Introduction to Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication minutes TOPIC 1: Defining Risk Communication: What It Is & What It Isn’t 30 minutes      Defining risk communication Goals and intended outcomes of risk communication Key components of risk communication Risk vs crisis communication Unpacking the message: application activity TOPIC 2: Risk Perception: Facts & Feelings     35 minutes Risk management elements Risk = Hazard + Outrage Outrage management, precaution advocacy, crisis/emergency communication Hazard + Outrage and your organization: application activity TOPIC 3: We’re all Risk Communicators: It Is Your Job! 15 minutes  Role of the official spokesperson  Food system risk communicators  Formal and informal information channels Summary of Module minutes Total 1.5 hours Best Practices Introduced in Module  Risk and crisis communication is an ongoing process Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page of 24 Module : An Introduction to Risk Communication # CONTENT T1.5 TRAINER NOTES 1.5 hours RESOURCES INTRODUCE MODULE 1: AN INTRODUCTION TO RISK COMMUNICATION Module introduces participants to definitions and concepts that serve as the foundation for sound risk communication practices T1.6 MODULE TOPICS Defining Risk Communication: What It Is & What It Isn’t Risk Perception: Facts & Feelings We’re All Risk Communicators: It Is Your Job! T1.7 MODULE LEARNER OUTCOMES Apply the risk communication goals to a catastrophic foodborne outbreak (Topic 1)  Describe the function of risk communication within the risk management model (Topic 2)  Identify the factors that drive perceptions of risk   Compare and contrast communicator roles from various segments of the food system (Topic 3) Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page of 24 M1 Topic One Defining Risk Communication: What It Is and What It Isn’t # CONTENT TRAINER NOTES T1.8 TOPIC 1: DEFINING RISK COMMUNICATION: WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT ISN’T T1.9 USDA DEFINITION OF RISK COMMUNICATION  Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 RESOURCES Source: USDA, 1992 “An open two-way exchange of information and opinion about risk leading to better understanding and better risk management decisions “ (1992) Note: Another definition frequently cited is from the National Research Council:  30 minutes #4 National Research Council Improving risk communication “ an integrative process of exchange of information and opinions among individuals, groups, and institutions; often involves multiple messages about the nature of the risk or expressing concerns, opinions, or reactions to risk messages or to the legal and institutional arrangements for risk management.” (1989) Page of 24 T1.10 RISK COMMUNICATION GOALS Tailor communication so it takes into account emotional response to event  Empower audience to make informed decisionmaking  Prevent negative behavior (that hampers response or causes more harm) and encourage constructive responses to crisis  T1.11 T1.12 Application Discussion:  Present real-life message examples that illustrate goals  Ask participants to identify which risk comm goal(s) is reflected in each message  Additional message examples can be found in the Risk Communication Clipping File slide set Discussion Questions: Message Example #1  How does this statement take into account the public’s emotional response?  What constructive behavior is encouraged?  How does the statement empower audiences to make informed decision-making? Risk Comm Clipping File #1 Application Questions: Message Example #2 Risk Comm Clipping File #2 How does this statement take into account the public’s emotional response?  What constructive behavior is encouraged?  Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page of 24 T1.13 Application Questions: Message Example #3  T1.14 T1.15 Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication What goal(s) is reflected in this risk communication message? [Ans: Takes into account emotional response] Application Questions: Message Example #4  Risk Comm Clipping File #4 What goal(s) is reflected in this risk communication message? [Ans: Empowers informed decision-making] Application Questions: Message Example #5  What goal(s) is reflected in this risk communication message? [Ans: Encourages constructive action] REV: 10/18/2022 Risk Comm Clipping File #3 Risk Comm Clipping File #5 Page of 24 T1.16 Risk Comm Clipping File #6 Application Questions: Message Example #6  T1.17 What goal(s) is reflected in this risk communication message? [Ans: Takes into account emotional response] RISK COMMUNICATION DIFFERS FROM A TRADITIONAL COMMUNICATION APPROACH Key Concept:  Audience has a dynamic role in the risk communication model T1.28 COMPONENTS OF RISK COMMUNICATION  Audience assessment – know the public Source: Peter Sandman Audience involvement – involve the public as partners  Message – information content  Logistics – how you get the content; how you get it to the audience; how you get their response back  Listening – for audience response  Metamessaging – how you say it, reflects how communicator and audience feel about event (more on metamessaging in Module 3)  Self-assessment – on-going   Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Evaluation - lessons learned Page of 24 T1.19 RISK COMMUNICATION INTENDED OUTCOMES Discussion Question: Ask participants what is NOT an intended outcome, for example: (commonly misunderstood)  Make people feel safe, less anxious, avoid panic  Assure public that their fear is unwarranted Note: Risk communication is only as good as the effectiveness to implement the plan, e.g Katrina evacuation T1.20 DISCIPLINES THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO RISK COMMUNICATION PRINCIPLES Risk Communication has evolved from a number of contributing disciplines:  EPA sought help bridging the gap between “expert” and “lay” perceptions of physical hazards  Psychologists answered by studying perceptions of hazard  Philosophical and sociological work focused on culturally shaped meanings of risk  Political science looked at decision-making based on risk  Communication scholars engaged in message design research Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page of 24 T1.21 CRISIS COMMUNICATION IS ONE FORM OF RISK COMMUNICATION  Risk communication includes communication strategies before, during and after the event or as preparedness, response and recovery  Crisis communication serves as a response to an emergency or crisis such as a foodborne outbreak Discussion Questions: Illustrate Risk Communication functions before and after a crisis  Pre-crisis: What types of risk communication messages are we seeing in anticipation of a pandemic outbreak? [Ans: raise awareness or fear to prompt preparedness actions]  Post-crisis: What types of risk communication messages have appeared following the E.coli – spinach outbreaks that occurred in 2006? [Ans: awareness of cross contamination hazards, properly preparing produce] T1.22 Application Activity: Unpacking the Message Purpose: Analyze message examples by applying concepts introduced in Topic Distribute selected “Unpacking the Message” examples to individuals or small groups  Ask participants to: 1) Identify whether example was intended for use before, during or after a crisis 2) Identify intended outcome(s) of the risk communication message • Share findings with the group  Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Handouts: Unpacking the MessageS: #6,9,13,14,15,17,19,25 Trainer’s Resource: M1.Unpacking Message Key Page of 24 T1.23 SUMMARY: WHAT RISK COMMUNICATION IS NOT T1.24 SUMMARY: WHAT RISK COMMUNICATION IS How we perceive risk will be considered in the next section (Topic 2) Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 10 of 24 M1 Topic Two 35 minutes Risk Perception: Facts & Feelings # CONTENT T2.25 TRAINER NOTES RESOURCES RISK COMMUNICATION IS A COMBINATION OF FACTS AND FEELINGS Risk perception drives risk communication Communicating about risk is difficult because of the way people interpret risk – an intersection of facts and feelings Risk sets the stage for emotional issues that capture headlines T2.26 Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication RISK ANALYSIS PARADIGM REV: 10/18/2022 Page 11 of 24 T2.27 RISK COMMUNICATION IS A KEY PART OF RISK MANAGEMENT Successful risk communication builds credibility and shared responsibility for risk management policies through involvement  These activities are not chronological; they occur simultaneously and interactively  T2.28 Discussion Question:  What are some contemporary food issues that represent these competing perspectives? Responses could include:  irradiated food  cloned meat and milk products  organic food  water fluoridation  pesticides  imported foods  transfats, etc T2.29 Optional Activity: U-Phoria Project Purpose: To demonstrate how we all interpret risk differently based on both subjective and objective analyses Instructions:  “Let’s examine how YOU interpret risk…” Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 12 of 24 T2.30  Present U-phoria pill’s background  Next field additional questions Give positive answers concerning cost, approval, access, availability, etc  When asked about the specifics concerning side effects, respond:  Severe diarrhea lasting up to 24-hours Next Step:  Instruct group to stand up  “Would you take the U-Phoria pill? Stay standing if you would you be willing to take the U-Phoria pill even if the odds of developing severe diarrhea were:  in 1,000,000,000  in 1,000,000  in 100,000  in 1,000  in 10  Side effects are seen with every dose! Follow-up Discussion:  Why was there a range of responses?  What does this tell us about risk perception? [Ans: perceptions of risk are individualized] T2.31 FACTORS THAT SHAPE RISK PERCEPTION Considerations that shape perceptions of risk  Hazard – something that can go wrong  Probability – likelihood of it happening  Consequences – implications of hazard  Value – subjective evaluation of the relative importance of what might be lost Applying these components to U-Phoria exercise:  Hazard – severe diarrhea  Probability – in billion, etc  Consequences – dehydration, etc, embarrassment, limited mobility  Value – memory boost, feelings of well-being Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 13 of 24 T2.32 T2.33 RISK PERCEPTION FACTORS INVOLVE BOTH THINKING & FEELINGS  Thinking (logic) focuses on the hazard (danger) and probability (likelihood or chance) of occurring  Feelings involves fear, anger and other emotions that are evoked when considering potential consequences and value of what may be lost GROWING DISCONNECT BETWEEN EXPERTS & PUBLIC Scientists’ orientation is fact-based, focused on probability  Consumers’ orientation is value-based, swayed by potential consequences  T2.34 EXAMPLE OF EXPERT – PUBLIC DISCONNECT Example of an expert who discounts Japanese consumers’ perception of the risk of BSE (mad cow) from imported U.S beef Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Clipping File #11 Page 14 of 24 T2.35 ANOTHER EXAMPLE: U.S CONSUMER RESPONSE TO MAD COW DISEASE IN 2003 Source: Minneapolis Star Tribune, January, 2004 This editorial cartoon captured the nation’s response to BSE (“mad cow disease”), where scientists and public health experts characterized a very small danger given the safeguards in place, while some consumer groups and politicians raised alarms which captured media attention and fed the fear factor T2.36 PETER SANDMAN Peter Sandman is a leading risk communication expert and member of NCFPD Risk Communication Team This quote refers to the fact that there is virtually no correlation between what upsets you and what can harm you Sometimes we're upset about serious risks, sometimes about silly ones T2.37 Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication About Peter Sandman: http://www.petersandman.com/# about Source of quote: http://www.psandman.com/hand outs/sand46.pdf Discussion Question:  What are some food-related “risks” that upset consumers? REV: 10/18/2022 Page 15 of 24 T2.38 RISK = HAZARD + OUTRAGE Hazard = danger/probability Outrage = fear/dread/anger #7 Sandman P The relationship between hazard and outrage http://www.psandman.com/hand outs/sand44.pdf According to Sandman:  Outrage is as real as hazard  Both are measurable  Both are manageable T2.39 DIFFERENT RISK COMMUNICATION APPROACHES #4 Sandman P Four kinds of risk communication The level of hazard and outrage determines the communication approach: • public relations • precaution advocacy • outrage management • crisis/emergency risk communication T2.40 OUTRAGE MANAGEMENT   Source: Peter Sandman Low hazard + high outrage Goal: Reduce outrage so people don’t take unnecessary precautions Food examples for outrage management:  BSE (Mad Cow)  Genetically modified foods (“Franken-foods”)  Cloned animal products Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 16 of 24 T2.41 PRECAUTION ADVOCACY Source: Peter Sandman High hazard + Low outrage Goal: increase fear to motivate preventative action  Also described as health education or issue management   Food examples for precaution advocacy:  Salmonella in undercooked poultry  Mercury in fish  High fat diet  Vibrio in shellfish  Raw milk and cheese  Undercooked ground meats T2.42 CRISIS/EMERGENCY RISK COMMUNICATION Source: Peter Sandman High hazard + High outrage Goal: Acknowledge hazard, validate concern, give people ways to respond  Examples: food safety example, bioterrorism event   Food examples for crisis or emergency risk communication:  E.coli-spinach outbreak  Bioterrorism event  Food recall Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 17 of 24 T2.43 Optional Activity: Applying Risk = Hazard + Outrage to your Organization Purpose: Apply model to food-related issues within participants’ organizations Handout: M1.Risk=Hazard+Outrage worksheet.doc Identify issues within your organization for each of the communication approaches  What are your organization’s communication goals for each issue?  Ask for volunteers to share responses Record on flipchart to represent range of food issues  M1 Topic Three We’re All Risk Communicators: It Is Your Job! # CONTENT T3.44 TRAINER NOTES 15 minutes RESOURCES TOPIC 3: WE’RE ALL RISK COMMUNICATORS The last topic discusses the role of the risk communicator in various segments of the food system Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 18 of 24 T3.45 BEYOND THE SPOKESPERSON Traditionally, risk communication is centralized in Public Information Officer (PIO) or spokesperson functions:  Industry CEO   Organization or agency head Communications director  Other “official spokespersons” Discussion Question: Who are the official spokespersons in your organization? T3.46 RISK COMMUNICATORS FROM THE FOOD SYSTEM SERVE MANY ROLES AND FUNCTIONS Foodborne outbreaks or emergencies will usually involve these risk communicators:  They participate in press conferences, prepare statements, address public in meetings, consumer service reps, etc  These persons should be trained in risk communication as part of an organization’s preparedness planning T3.47 Food system risk communicators continued: Images: Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) http://www.csrees.umd.edu/ I Images: Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) http://www.csrees.umd.edu/ Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 19 of 24 T3.48 RISK COMMUNICATORS WE OVERLOOK Risk communication occurs in other settings as well It is important to recognize the importance of these communicators within your organization Images: Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) http://www.csrees.umd.edu/ Discussion Questions:  What are the formal communication channels used by your organization?  What are informal information channels in your organization? T3.49 Case Study: Schwan’s Salmonella Outbreak, 1994 Case study illustrates importance of these “informal” risk communicators:  Schwan’s is a privately owned company based in Minnesota that features home delivered food products  In 1994, an estimated 224,000 persons were exposed to salmonella contaminated ice cream  Source – tanker trucks carrying ice cream premix had not been cleaned adequately  Home delivery drivers were instrumental in communicating with customers and restoring trust in Schwan’s products [Key concept] #9 Sellnow, T and R Littlefield, eds Lessons Learned about protecting America’s food supply Discussion Questions:  Who are the employees in your organization who could serve a similar function during a foodrelated emergency? Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 20 of 24 T3.50 BEST PRACTICES FOR EFFECTIVE RISK COMMUNICATION #8 Seeger, M Best practices in risk and crisis communication: an expert panel process Note:  10 Best Practices for effective Risk Communication were identified by NCFPD Risk Communication Project collaborators  Best practices will be highlighted at the end of each module Handout: M1.T3.Risk Comm Best Practices.doc Best practices principle introduced in the module:  Risk and crisis communication is an ongoing process o Implement as preparedness, response and recovery strategies o Incorporate risk communication into the policy development process o Continuously evaluate and update crisis communication plans Glossary Terms Consequences - implications of hazard Crisis - an event that is a serious risk both in hazard terms and in outrage terms; a discrete situation that poses high-hazard high-outrage risks Crisis and emergency communication – communication during a crisis Danger - something that can go wrong or has uncertain consequences of potential harm Emergency risk communication - attempt by experts to provide information to allow an individual, stakeholders, or an entire community to make the best possible decisions about their well being within nearly impossible time constraints and ultimately accept the imperfect nature of choices during a crisis… (CDCynergy) Hazard – something that can go wrong Issues management communication – similar to crisis communication, however, organization has advance knowledge of impending crisis and opportunity to choose the timing of the communication to stakeholders and the public and the issue and organization’s plan to resolve it (CDCynergy) Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 21 of 24 Metamessaging - all the content of crisis communications other than information content: how reassuring to be, how confident to sound, how to address emotion, etc Outrage - psychological reaction people have to a perceived threat, e.g fear, anger, frustration, dread Panic - sudden strong feeling of fear that prevents reasonable thought or action Pre-crisis communication - communication about a possible future crisis Probability – likelihood of it happening, based on statistics Psychometrics - the psychological theory or technique of mental measurement Relative risk - risk of disease among those exposed/risk among unexposed Risk - measurement of the likelihood and consequence of something bad happening combined with our psychological reaction to it (outrage) Note: term ‘risk’ is used by most biological and medical scientists to indicate simply the likelihood and consequence of an event Risk - probability of loss of that which we value (value-based, not knowledge-based) (Covello) Risk analysis - A set of tools used to support rational decision-making in the face of uncertainty Includes hazard identification, risk assessment, risk management and risk communication Note: the term risk analysis is sometimes used as a synonym for risk assessment Risk communication - an integrative process of exchange of information and opinions among individuals, groups, and institutions; often involves multiple messages about the nature of the risk or expressing concerns, opinions, or reactions to risk messages or to the legal and institutional arrangements for risk management (NCR, 1989) Discussion about an adverse outcome and probability of that outcome occurring for an individual In some instances, risk communication has been employed to help an individual make a choice about whether or not to undergo a medical treatment, continue to live next to a nuclear plant, pass on his genetic risk, or elect to vaccinate a healthy baby against whooping cough (CDCynergy) Risk communicator - person discussing risk formally (spokesperson) or through informal channels, e.g employee in conversation with customer Stakeholders - groups or individuals who have influence or are involved in the decision-making process SMEs: Subject Matter Experts Value – subjective evaluation of the relative importance of what might be lost Module Sources Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 22 of 24 Covello V and Sandman P (2001) Risk communication: evolution and revolution In A Wolbarst (Ed.), Solutions to an Environment in Peril (pp 165-178) Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press Available online: http://www.psandman.com/articles/covello.htm Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2003) Emergency Risk Communication CDCynergy Atlanta Available online: http://www.orau.gov/cdcynergy/erc/ Fischhoff, B and Downs J (1997) Communicating foodborne disease risk Emerging Infectious Diseases, (4) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Available online: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol3no4/fischof.htm) National Research Council (1989) Improving risk communication Washington D.C.:National Academy Press Sandman, P (2003) Four kinds of risk communication Available online: http://www.psandman.com/handouts/sand17.pdf Sandman, P (1993) Relationship between hazard and outrage Available online: http://www.psandman.com/handouts/sand44.pdf Sandman, P (Rev 2006) Fundamentals of risk communication Available online: http://www.psandman.com/handouts/topical.htm#four Seeger, M (2006) Best practices in risk and crisis communication: an expert panel process Journal of Applied Communication, 34 (3) National Communication Association Sellnow, T and R Littlefield, eds Lessons learned about protecting America’s food supply, Institute for Regional Studies, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, 2005 10 Slovic ,P (1987) Perception of risk Science, 236, 280-285 Available online: http://communityrisks.cornell.edu/BackgroundMaterials/Slovic-Science1987.pdf 11 World Health Organization (2005) Outbreak communication, best practices for communicating with public during an outbreak Report of the WHO Expert Consultation on Outbreak Communications, September 21-23, 2004, Singapore Available online: http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO_CDS_2005_32web.pdf\ 12 World Health Organization (2005) Outbreak communication guidelines Available online: http://www.who.int/infectious-disease news/IDdocs/whocds200528/whocds200528en.pdf Additional Resources  Fisher, A et al Risk communication for industry practitioners: an annotated bibliography Risk Communication Specialty Group, Society for Risk Analysis McLean, VA August, 1995 Available on line at: http://www.sra.org/rcsg/risk.pdf  Neuhauser, L and Ereman, R “Essentials of risk communication for public health practice.” UC Berkeley Center for Infectious Disease Preparedness, April 5, 2005 Webcast available online at: http://www.idready.org/webcast/viewwebcast.php# Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 23 of 24  Parker, Cindy Crisis communication: how to talk to people about disasters Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health Preparedness, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Narrated slides available online at: : http://www.jhsph.edu/preparedness/training/online/crisis_communication.html Contributors  William Hueston, Director, Center for Animal Health and Food Safety, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, MN  Peter Sandman, Risk Communication specialist, www psandman.com  Steven Venette, Associate Professor of Communication, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS Module 1: An Introduction to Risk Communication REV: 10/18/2022 Page 24 of 24