Nuclear Communications – Insights from Social Psychology and the Social Sciences
John C.H. Lindberg MA, MA (Hons), FRSA
Why does Perception Matter?
- Inverse risk vs. benefit: The higher the we perceive the benefit, the lower we perceive the risk (and reverse)
- Perception shapes relationship with the world: In the nuclear context – “radiophobia”. Ex:
-
- Non-deployment of nuclear
- Stress-related deaths (Chernobyl & Fukushima Daiichi)
- Unnecessary abortions (Chernobyl)
-
- Perception drives policymaking: If perceived to be high risk, more difficult to get support – cause demonstrations, higher costs, political instability, etc.
The Lazy, Emotional, Unconscious Brain
The Construction of Fear
We are born with two fears:
- Falling
- Loud noises
All other fears are “created”, shaped, amplified, and attenuated, by our surroundings.
Many fears rely on the social construction of risk as we do not experience them ourselves.
- Radiation prime example:
- Cannot be perceived
- Linked w. cancer
Drivers of Nuclear Perception
| Drivers of Nuclear Perception | Factors With No or Very Minor Impact on Nuclear Perception |
|---|---|
|
· Trust – e.g. in regulators, operators, governments. · Gender – women significantly more skeptical to nuclear. · Perceived benefits and risks – significant determinant. · Priorly-held views – often subject to social learning. · Affect and other heuristics – emotional links major determinants.
|
· Knowledge – neither measured or self-reported has any major role in explaining views on nuclear, or changing views.
|
Biases & Heuristics
1. Confirmation Bias
– Cherry picking of evidence to back already held views or “truths”.
2. Backfire Effect, Cognitive Dissonance
- We avoid having conflicting beliefs and attitudes because it makes us feel uncomfortable.
- The clash is usually dealt with by rejecting, debunking, or avoiding new information.
- Rejecting, rationalizing, or avoiding information that conflicts with our beliefs can lead us to make poor decisions.
- This is because the information is not rejected because it is false but because it makes us uncomfortable. Information that is both true and useful can often have this effect.
3. Affect Heuristic
- Feelings > Facts
- Can influence decisions in any domain, and has been demonstrated that we tend to rely on this heuristic more in situations where there is significant time pressure
- Positive affect = low risk, high benefits
- Negative affect = high risk, low benefits
An Example of (In)Effective Risk Communication
Safety First…?
Problem statement and standard response:
“Opinion polls show that people are most concerned about nuclear safety and nuclear risks. In order to make them feel more comfortable with nuclear, let’s show them how safe we are”
Outcome?
People become more concerned about the potential risks of nuclear power
Why?
The boomerang effect.
Effective Risk Communication
- Risk = human experiences and emotions => risk communication must be human. Acknowledge fears, concerns, worries, and respond to them with compassion, not invalidation or by offering statistics.
- Emotions, emotions, emotions. We are all driven by them – like it or not! – and they need to be accounted for in all communication efforts.
- Any risk communication must be tailored to its audience and their needs – not yours! Ask about their views, concerns and thoughts, do not assume!
- Facts and figures, whilst important elsewhere, do not play any significant role in shaping our views on risks.
- Wherever possible, use messages and images that provide hope. Fear can a potent communications device, but so is hope.