1. Respond as completely as possible to audience biases, misconceptions,
feelings, concerns and needs surrounding the risk.
2. Use language
and concepts that the intended audience(s) already understand(s)
(e.g., people may misinterpret percentages).
3. Use magnitudes common
in ordinary experience (e.g., 5 out of 100 may be clearer than
.05).
4. Instead of expressing probabilities in quantitative (numeric)
terms, try to use a qualitative term that is close
in meaning (if a tested term is available) (e.g., a .90 probability
may
be better
expressed as “very likely”).
5. Stick to informing an audience unless
influencing techniques have been deemed appropriate following
a legitimate scientific
and public
process (e.g,. let audiences know that radon may
be a bigger threat for smokers than for non-smokers).
6. When applicable,
emphasize cumulative probabilities instead of one-shot probabilities
(e.g., probability of HIV
infection from
a single unprotected exposure may be overestimated
than the probability of infection from repeated unprotected exposures).
7. Be
conscious about how different ways of describing risks reflect
different values and can be misleading or
manipulative (e.g.,
deaths per ton of chemical produced or deaths per facility?).
8. Be
careful while using risk comparisons (most or rarely accepted,
less or even less desirable).
9. Use clear visuals to accompany
or replace other forms of communication, whenever is possible.
10. Test
all messages with members of the intended audience.
This issue of THCU's newsletter from fall 2000 provides an overview
of risk communication along with information on planning risk
communication efforts, developing messages,
and evaluating. It also contains articles from Ontario experts, describing
their lessons-learned from local experiences. (PDF 590kb) This
issue continues in a special
supplement.
