Communicating Nuclear Risk: Evaluating Current Tools

• In Event: The Political Psychology of Citizen Perceptions

Abstract

Since the end of the Cold War, widespread discourse regarding nuclear risk has disappeared, producing a lack of meaningful concern among citizens regarding nuclear threats. Yet the United States’ recent political transition, and the explicit statements made regarding nuclear weapons, have added salience and urgency to nuclear risk communications. Nuclear fear is, for better or worse, back again. Despite a surge in public interest, the average American has little awareness of nuclear threats and, in the event of a nuclear detonation, is ill-prepared to take the actions needed to save preventable casualties, including their own. Research in the social sciences has broadly demonstrated that risk communications designed to influence the general public often fail. How can we communicate nuclear risk in a way that increases its salience in the minds of the public, shifts threat perception, and/or leads to a willingness to take action? Which types of communication attempts promote message acceptance and increased knowledge? This study uses a survey experiment to evaluate and compare the impact of existing communication tools regarding nuclear risk, leveraging emotional responses and individual characteristics, to determine the effectiveness of different tools under varying contexts. Specifically, we examine the impact of tools that vary in both type (i.e. newspaper article, televised news report, infographic/pamphlet, and public service announcement/video) and source (i.e. government versus non-government). The findings serve as an important basis for the identification of concrete strategies upon which interested communications stakeholders can act.

Author

• Kristyn L. Karl, Stevens Institute of Technology