Risk Communication: Concept and Method

Toshiko, KIKKAWA
(Keio Univ.)

1. What is a Risk?

A risk is defined as “the degree of hazard*the probability of occurrence of a hazard" in a limited sense. By this definition, the thing for which the degree of hazard and the probability of occurrence of a hazard cannot be estimated (things of which risk is impossible to manage) will not be recognized as a risk. In a broad sense, we may include things for which risk cannot be assessed.

2. What is Risk Communication?

Risk communication is defined as interactive process of exchange of information and opinion among individuals, groups, and institutions (NRC, 1989)(fig.1). Risk communication is defined as a process of interaction; meanwhile, risk message is defined as a process of one-way distribution of information.

3. History of Risk Communication

The term “Risk Communication" was used in 1984 for the first time. However, before that, the article “Informing people about a risk" in 1980 was actually about risk communication substantively, and the first research project on risk communication actually might be from 1983.

The first conference on risk communication was held in 1986 in USA. The first conference in Europe was held in 1988. In this process, the definition in American Congress of Risk Communication in 1989 has been recognized as the authoritative definition.

4. The Background of the Idea of Risk Communication

The idea of risk communication began to gather attention in the background of the highlighted concern for the public's right to know. By that time, psychologists had had enough psychological knowledge about communication to apply it to risk problems. They needed a new term “risk communication" in order to spread this new idea into the society. Human beings tend to need a new term in order to spread a new idea.

5. Duty and Right in Risk Communication

A messenger has 4 duties in risk communication such as practical duty, moral duty, psychological duty, institutional duty.

The practical duty is “You must give information for people who face a risk to avoid the hazard". Moral duty is “Citizens have a right to access information so that they can choose." Psychological duty is “People need information. It is irrational to deny knowledge that is useful for them to cope with fear, to fill the need, and to control their fate." Institutional duty is “People expect that the government will regulate the industrial risk and so on effectively and efficiently. And also, the people expect that they receive the information which shows the government is carrying out its responsibility".

On the other hand, consumers have 4 rights(1962 Kennedy's presidential message).Those are a right to seek safety, a right to be informed, a right to choose, a right to be listened.

The 4 duties of messengers for risk communication and the 4 rights of consumers correspond very well. The practical duty corresponds to the right to seek safety, the moral duty to the right to choose, the psychological duty to the right to be informed. I am not sure if the institutional duty corresponds to right to be listened.

6. Problems in Risk communication

There are 2 kinds of problematic situation in risk communication. One is the case that a messenger does not have a will to do his or her duty. The other case is that a messenger has a will, however he or she do not have a technical problem to do the duty. Psychological knowledge will contribute to solve the latter situation.

7. Personal Choice and Public Debate

There are 2 kinds of cases about risk communication; personal choice and public debate. A case for “personal choice" is a case in which one can decide if he or she avoids the risk as personal choice. The other case “public debate" is a case in which risk shouldn't be avoided by private choice but by public route, and in which they need public debate about the risk.

The cases which are better suited for personal choices include cases about living ware issue, health issue, medical issue, and disasters. For these cases, a persuasive communication method is allowed to use for these cases because people tend to estimate the risk lower than the truth.

The cases which are better suited for public debates include cases about high-technology issues and environmental issues. For these cases, a persuasive communication method is not allowed to use because it is necessary to make consensus.

8. Procedures of Risk Communication

Basic procedures of risk communication are as follows: gathering people's opinions, making materials, explanation and exchange of opinions, and Q&A.

How should you gather people's opinion? The first choice is questionnaires. You should use closed questions basically. The merit of closed questions is that you can know the entire trend, and the demerit is that it is difficult to know how people are thinking. Secondly, you can know people's interests from the questions and references from the people. This survey is a kind of open question style survey. The merit of open questions is that you can know how people are thinking, and the demerit is that it is difficult to figure out quantitatively. The third method is a focus group interview. In case you can not use the methods above, you may be able to hear on-sight opinions.

As a strategy, you may be able to use making materials, anticipated questions and planned answers, briefing sessions, interlocution meetings, symposiums, and so on. Methods of interlocution meeting include CAP, coffee crunch, and consensus meetings. In these meetings, the role of facilitator is very important.

9. Psychological Knowledge about Citizen Participation

There exist two main findings about citizen participation. The first finding is that more chances of voice, or more chances to participate in discussion process, give citizens more sense of fairness. Psychological study shows that giving citizens a chance to participate in discussion process(process control) satisfies citizen's sense of fairness more than giving citizens a chance to participate in decision making (decision control).

The second finding supports citizen participation theoretically. A group discussion method is more effective than a one-way lecture method.

Psychological knowledge sometimes supports citizen participation, and sometimes represses citizen participation. It depends on one's intention to use psychological knowledge.

10. Decision Making in Group

From psychological perspective, it is not necessarily the case that to decide by everyone conduces to the best decision. This problem is known as a problem of groupthink. The mechanism of groupthink is called “hidden profile".

Groupthink is the phenomena that verification ability or judgment about moral becomes impaired by internal pressure within the group. Well known examples of groupthink are Kennedy's decision about invasion to Cuba and the Challenger disaster. It is pointed out that causes of groupthink are a temporal pressure, an uncritical embrace to principle of majority rule, a particularity of knowledge and a technique about the issue, and absence of stakeholders.

How you should prevent groupthink? The several methods are effective;1)to review the discussion with a roles who are opposed to majority opinion, 2)to divide the group members into several groups, and group discussion in each group, 3)A leader takes a role who is opposed to the majority, 4)existing of whistle blower, and so on.

11. Difficulty of Whistle Blowing

Some difficulties exist about whistle blowing. At first, whistle-blower cannot blow unless he or she is aware of the problem. Secondly, he or she will not blow unless he or she is not ethical and bona-fide, as you can see in the case of Pinto Car, and fake mochi in Korea. And, organization of risk management can not find out the problem without whistle blowing as you can see in the case of concealment of recalls by Mitsubishi Mortors, and in the delay of notification of the emergence of bird flu. However, whistle blowing does not happen too often because a subsequent life of whistle blowing person tends to be misery. In most cases in history, whistle blowing persons were women with no possibility of career progress.

12. Transmission of Negative Information

We have several psychological findings about transmission of negative information. Generally, which is easily passed on, good news or bad news? It is a psychological fact that people tend to pass on good news easily than bad news. This phenomenon is called MUM effect. Desirability of the information does not affect the speed of transmission; however, a fact is known that some kinds of information tend to be passed on faster than the other kinds of information.

The psychological study of MUM effect shows the facts below; 1) negative information does not tend to be passed on to a person in charge but to surrounding people of the person, 2) Good news tend to be passed on in more detail than bad news, 3) a woman passed on information easily than a man, 4) people with less desire of career progress easily pass on information than much desire.

What should you learn from MUM effect? At first, negative information is difficult to pass on in an organization. For example, in the case of Snow Brand Milk Products, the factory director did not carry the information about the food intoxication to the president who was attending the stockholders general meetings. Secondly, whistle blowing seldom happen. Thirdly, negative information tends to be passed on in moderation. For instance, a medical doctor tends to tell bad news to his or her patient in moderate.

This fact is not included in MUM effect, but it is known that negative information tend to be passed on in moderate and in equivocal (cf. equivocal communication).The word “equivocal" is often used in political context. “Equivocal" means "to be deliberately unclear in the way that you give information or your opinion". For example, the Japanese government official in charge of the HIV measure said “Please listen to my information as reference…" in order to pass it on in moderate when he told bad news about HIV.

13. Hidden Profile

Psychological study about discussion shows that information which is shared with the group members is easily discussed and has a high possibility to be a conclusion than the information which is not shared. Larger the number of people who share the information is, higher the possibility that the shared information is discussed and become a conclusion.

14. Add-Up -Merit and Demerit of Group Discussion

As shown above, from the psychological viewpoint, to decide something in group discussion does not necessarily conduce to the best decision. Decision by the most excellent person in a group conduces to the best decision. However, we actually prefer a group decision making to an autocratic decision making, because we can not tell what the best answer is and who is the excellent person in the process of decision making, and because we prefer democratic society to autocratic society.

I think it is important to deny an autocracy with knowing the limit of group discussion that negative information is difficult to transfer and that shared information tends to be a conclusion of the group discussion.

15. Future Discussion

We need further discussion on the themes below; 1) Method of making consensus. 2) Risk communication with the social vulnerable who cannot avoid risks by themselves that average people can avoid. 3) Communication about and management of much hazardous risk, how to fairly allocate a risk/benefit in each area. 4) Reflection on slip-up to a caution of an early date.

Q&A:

1. Shared Information in Hidden Profile

Q: I would like to ask about hidden profile. Are there any difference between information that is easily shared and information that is not easily shared?

A: We, psychologist, are not interested in that problem. The essence of hidden profile is that shared information has high possibility to be a conclusion of the group discussion. Information which is shared with the group members is easily discussed than the information which is not shared.

2. Four Duty of a Messenger in Risk Communication

Q: You said that psychological knowledge is helpful only for the case that the messengers have a will to fulfill the duties but they don't have technique. However, in our society, most cases are cases that messengers don't have a will to fulfill the duties. What should we do about the latter case?

A: The solution of the latter type of case is beyond my expertness. The first case includes psychological problem; however the latter case includes ethical problem.

3. Difference in National Character about Whistle Browning

Q: In the last of 1970's, some international magazine held a reader survey on ethical issues. No Japanese answer to the survey. I think people in different nations have different psychological character. For example, Korean people tend to speak aggressively and clearly; meanwhile, Japanese tend to speak mildly. American people tend to appeal their opinion. USA stood out in Engineering Ethics from 1960's to 1980's; meanwhile other countries addressed it quietly.

A: I cannot answer it because I have no data about differences in national characters I think differences in minds of risk management organization to listen to the whistle are more important than differences in national characters if there are some differences among Japan, USA, and European nations.

4. Difference between Medical Ethics and Engineering Ethics-Informed Consent

Q: One of the important difference between medical ethics and engineering ethics is that informed consent is established in medical ethics but that informed consent cannot be established. In medical practice, it is possible to establish informed consent because target persons of the risk are limited. In engineering, it is difficult to establish informed consent because products will be sold to unspecified majority. So, I think a private choice is difficult about engineering products. What do you think of it?

A: Aren't a cautionary statement or instruction manual enough to pass on risk information about engineering products? I think it is possible to make all kinds of efforts to establish informed consent for engineering products. I don't think there exists a difference between the two areas.

5. Procedural Justice

Q: You said that a process control enhance satisfaction of citizen more than a decision control. I think your expression tends to be made bad use of by the power. You pointed out that the government may try to release citizens' frustration by letting the citizens participate in the discussion process according to the theory. However, in the present society, citizens feel frustration that the results do not change even if they participate in the discussion and appeal their opinions.

A: I agree with you. Psychological knowledge is possible to make bad use of. However, a fact is a fact. What I can do is to tell the psychological facts, and to ask people not to make bad use of them.

6. Definition of Risk

Q: You said that things for which the degree of hazard and the probability of occurrence of a hazard cannot be estimated would not be recognized as a risk. Then, what do you call things which are not recognized as a risk. For example, do you recognize an earthquake as a risk by that definition, which I think it is difficult to estimate the probability of occurrence of?

A: We call the things of which we can estimate quantitatively a risk. I think it is possible to an earthquake as a risk because we can estimate quantitatively the probability of occurrence even though it is not so accurate. I don't know how to call the things which is not recognized as a risk.

7. Whistle-Blowing

Q: The president of Rock Field is telling the working staffs to tell him if they have what they want to do blow whistles at first. And he is recommending them to blow whistles and tell the problem to the outside world unless he goes into action even though they told him. I think it is important to remember the existence of this type of company which is promoting whistle blowing.

8. History of Risk Communication

Q: In USA, a lot of political scandals happened in 1970's and 80's, and they took accounting measures and criminal measures to them. The COSO report about risk management in accounting was released in 1980's, and a systematic risk management was suggested by academics. In 1986, the sentencing guidelines started in criminal low. You did not mention these things in your lecture. Are these things out of psychological interest?

A: Yes. I am not concern financial and economical risk, and laws.

9. Personal Choice and Public Debate

Q:You said that a persuasive communication method is allowed to use for cases in which personal choice works, but is not allowed for cases in which public debate is needed. Is my understanding about personal choice and public debate as follows right?
The cases for personal choice are cases of which what procedure is harmful has been identified. In these kinds of case, it is important to let people know the contents of the risk: what procedure causes what result. So a persuasive communication is appropriate for these cases. However, for example, in the ethics of gene technology, we can not tell what is right or wrong scientifically. It depends on each person's vision of the world. So, a messenger should not use a persuasive communication in order to force a messenger's personal vision. This is my understanding about personal choice and public debate. Is it a right understanding?

A:It is said that you must not use a persuasive communication for the case which is appropriate to public debate even though the risk estimation is scientifically clear. Now, researchers of risk communication are interested in how to involve risks that are difficult to estimate scientifically into the public debate. So, I think your definition of a public debate case is a little too narrow. It may seem to inefficient and wasteful to debate issues of which risk is not clear in the public; however, it is possible to debate publicly them if we discuss them with knowing unclearness of the risk. So, we don't distinguish cases for private choice from cases for public debate by the clearness of the risk.