COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 1
COMM 426: Health Risk & Crisis Communication
Professor
Dr. Brian H. Spitzberg
Semester
Spring 2014
Office
COMM Bldg 201
Schedule #
20852
Office Hours
Tu-W-Th: 10:30-11:30 & by apt.
Classroom
COM 205
Office Phone
619.594.7097 (email preferred)
Mailbox
COMM BLDG. 205
E-mail
spitz@mail.sdsu.edu
Class Time
T-Th 12:30-1:45
Textbook
1. Required:
 Ulmer, R. R., Sellnow, T. L., & Seeger, M. W. (2011). Effective crisis
communication: Moving from crisis to opportunity. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
ISBN: 978-1-4129-8034-0
 Andersen, P. A., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2009). Myths and maxims of risk and crisis
communication. In D. O’Hair & R. Heath (Eds.), Handbook of risk and crisis
communication (pp. 207-228). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Additional documents may be uploaded from time to time on Blackboard.
Research by Morreale & Pearson (2008) identifed “emerging concerns in the
21st century,” including “health communication, crisis and communication,
crime and policing” (p. 228). Risk communication consists of all message
behaviors referring or relevant to potential hazards to individual and societal
health and well-being. Crisis communication consists of message behaviors
oriented to managing events that potentially have deleterious implications for
the preferred identity or health of individuals, organizations, and societies. In
general, risk communication refers to message strategies affecting ways of
preparing for, preventing, and avoiding crises, whether personal or societal. In
contrast, crisis communication refers to message strategies that facilitate
response to, repair, and revival from crises during and after their occurrence.
This course is an examination of the various theories, research paradigms, and
implications for communication in preparing for and responding to health
risks and crises.
Description: Role of communication in preventing, responding to, and coping
with natural disasters and human-generated crises; principles of competent
management of risk and crisis communication in interpersonal, intraorganizational, inter-organizational, and intergovernmental contexts.
Specifically, the objectives are to:
(1) Identify and differentiate the nature, types and causes of disasters,
crises, and large-scale risks to human welfare;
(2) Identify and differentiate the roles that communication and
communicators play in moderating and ameliorating the occurrence,
processes, and outcomes of disasters, crises, and risks;
(3) Compare, contrast and critique different theoretical models toward
Overview
Objectives
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 2
Assignment
Overview
Grade Scale
Attendance
Policies
Students with
Disabilities
managing communication in disasters and crises;
(4) Identify and differentiate applications of the principles by which risk
communication can competently influence the personal and societal
costs of disasters and crises, as well as optimize the outcomes and
opportunities afforded by risks, crises and disasters;
(5) Draft a “communication plan” for managing a major risk, crisis or disaster
in an applied setting or context;
(6) Demonstrate mastery of A.P.A. style guide, professional writing
competence, and ability to formulate sound arguments and claims.
(1) Examination #1: Multiple-choice/True-False examination on textbook and
lecture materials (100 points)
(2) Examination #2: Multiple-choice/True-False examination on textbook and
lecture materials (100 points)
(3) Case Analysis or Communication Plan Paper & Presentation (100 points)
Grades are based on a total point system (.60, .70, .80, .90 main cuts, with .x3,
and .x7 mid-grade cuts). There is no normative curving.
282-300 = A
261-269 = B+ 231-239 = C+ 201-209 = D+
270-281 = A249-260 = B
219-230 = C
189-200 = D
240-248 = B- 210-218 = C- 180-188 = D- 000-179 = F
Attendance is strongly encouraged but not required, except on exam days. Excuses
are recognized for personal illness serious enough to see a physician (thus,
warranting an appointment slip), family crisis, or participation in school-related
activities (thus, warranting an official notification from the activity coordinator). The
latter requires that prior arrangements be made. The former two are more credible
with calls on the day of absence, and personal conference as soon as possible
thereafter. Exams will not be given early for any reason. Record the dates of your
final exam NOW, and plan travel schedules accordingly. In particular, the final exam
date is set. DO NOT SCHEDULE TRIPS OR EVENTS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THIS DATE!
If you are a student with a disability and believe you will need accommodations for
this class, it is your responsibility to contact Student Disability Services at (619) 5946473. To avoid any delay in the receipt of your accommodations, you should contact
SDS as soon as possible. Accommodations are not retroactive, and accommodations
based upon disability cannot be provided until DSS has received an
accommodation letter from Student Disability Services.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 3
COMM 426: Communication in Health Risk & Crises*
Week
Date
S:14
SPRING 2014
01-23
01-28
01-30
02-04
02-06
“Essentials”; introductions
“Essentials,” cont.
Defining Crisis Communication
Lessons on Managing Crisis Communication
Cont.
02-11
02-13
02-18
02-20
02-25
02-27
03-04
03-06
03-11
03-13
03-18
03-20
03-25
03-27
04-01
04-03
04-08
04-10
04-15
04-17
04-22
04-24
04-29
05-01
05-06
05-08
Lessons on Effective Crisis Communication
Cont.
WSCA—No class on 2/18/12
Lessons on Effective Crisis Leadership
Cont.
Case Studies: Industrial Accidents
Case Studies: Food-Borne Illness
Cont.
Case Studies: Terrorism
Cont.
Case Studies: Natural Disasters
Cont.
Case Studies: Financial Crises
Cont.
Spring Break/Cesar Chavez Day
Reading
s
Assignments
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
**
05-15
*
**
Case Studies: Crisis du jour (emergent crisis
of the semester)
Learning Through Failure
Cont.
Risk & Communication Campaigns
Ethical Demands & Issues in Crises
Presentations of Case Analysis or
Communication Plans
Presentations Cont.
Renewal, Revival, & Re-envisioning
FINAL EXAM**:
Thursday, May 15, 10:30-12:30
ECC: 1
ECC: 2;
A&S
A&S: Andersen, & Spitzberg (2009). Myths and
maxims of risk and crisis communication. In
O’Hair & Heath (Eds.), Handbook of risk and
crisis communication (pp. 207-228). LEA.
Ch. 3;
Ch. 4
Recommend group meeting
Ch. 5
Ch. 6
Ch. 7
Ch. 8
EXAM #1
Ch. 9
Ch. 10
Ch. 11
Ch. 12
Final Paper Due; Presentations
begin
Presentations continue
Ch. 13
EXAM #2
This Schedule may be revised as the semester ensues. Fair notice will be announced in class and Blackboard, and
students are responsible for abiding by the most recent version of the schedule.
NOTE: This is the final exam date! Inform family, friends, and the people who are getting married that travel during
this time on this date is not possible because it is scheduled as of the first day of class!
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 4
Case Analysis or
Comm. Plan
Paper &
Presentation
Exams
Exam Grading
Writing Style
Guide
Late Work
Incompletes
This assignment involves one of four options, involving either of two types of hazard
(threat/risk, or crisis/disaster), and either of two types of timeline: analysis (past) or
plan (future): a post-mortem case analysis (i.e., a past actual event) or a plan (i.e., a
prospective event):
1. Threat/Risk Communication Case Analysis
2. Crisis/Disaster Case Analysis
3. Threat/Risk Communication Plan
4. Crisis/Disaster Communication Plan
The paper will be 25-30 pages of text, not including tables, figures, bullet-point lists,
title page, and appendices. In addition, there will be an accompanying PowerPoint
(or Prezi) presentation that will be presented in class. See further details of the
assignment.
Exams are objective format (multiple-choice, true/false), covering lecture, and any
materials distributed to the class. The final exam may be cumulative and
comparative across topics of the semester. Detailed review sheets will be made
available prior to each exam. Optical scanning answer sheets (ParSCORE “small
red”) and No. 2 pencils are the student’s responsibility on exam days. No electronic
devices (i.e., cellphones, earphones, MP3 devices, cameras, tape recorders,
calculators, e-books, e-tablets, laptop computers, or electronic dictionaries) are
permitted during exams. Any evidence of any such device in sight of a student will
result in that student’s failure on that exam, and if there is evidence of any attempt at
recording or copying exam materials, or making use of other stolen materials, the
student may be failed for the course and reported to Student Rights &
Responsibilities.
Items that are overly difficult, not discriminating or unreliable are adjusted based on
statistical analyses (overall item discrimination, item reliability, item difficulty,
response options with greater reliability than the keyed option). There will be no
curving of grades after these adjustments are made. Grades are uploaded to
Blackboard only after these adjustments are made.
This course, like the entire School of Communication, requires all written
assignments to use the APA (5th ed.) style guide for references, headings, and other
format considerations not otherwise specified by the course assignment.
Any paper turned in late will be reduced 10 points per weekday that passes beyond
the scheduled due date, excepted only for university or professor recognized excuses.
The credibility of excuse will depend in part on diligence in apprising the instructor of
the situation.
An “I” grade is assigned when a faculty member concludes that a student cannot meet
a clearly identifiable portion of course requirements within the academic term for
unforeseen reasons. An incomplete is not provided because a course or schedule is
too difficult or because time was not managed sufficiently.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 5
Tips for
Studying for
Exams
First, study comparatively. A multiple-choice good item has to present a condition
(i.e., root) that one and only one answer (i.e., stem) correctly fulfills. However, the
remaining stems (i.e., foils) must seem correct to the unstudied mind. For foils to
seem correct, they often use words and concepts that are legitimate content for the
course, but that do not uniquely fit the condition identified in the item root. A
student who merely skims or memorizes materials will see several stems that “look”
correct, when only one stem actually legitimately fulfills the item root. In order to
know which stem is correct requires not only that the stems are recognized, but also
what makes the concepts distinct and different from one another, and how they
relate to the condition specified in the root. This means studying comparatively,
which in turn suggests several study techniques.
 Memorization is important, but only a small part of the picture. Memorization
helps with definitions, lists, model components, and stages or sequences.
However, it does not help much with comparison, contrast, analysis and
synthesis.
 When studying a concept, ask how it relates to other similar but different
concepts. It is important to analyze the differences between concepts, rather
than just understanding the concept by itself.
 Successive integrative outlining may help. This means to outline the class notes
into a more concise set of notes, and then outline text chapters into a concise
set of notes, and then combining student outlines. This activity leads to
compare and contrast “where things belong in relation to each other.” The
resulting integrative outline can then serve as a final study document. This
practice is time-consuming, but can also be very beneficial.
Second, develop hypotheticals and examples. Not all objective exams use
hypothetical examples. However, it may help relate to materials by attempting to
apply the concepts of the course to practical experiences or situations. This also
helps differentiate subtle distinctions among related concepts.
Third, study past exams. The professor permits students to look over their
own exams. Such review can help “get into the mind” of the instructor. It can also
improve familiarity with the exam style, which can help preparation for the next
exam. Sometimes patterns are noticed (e.g., missing items later on an exam due to
fatigue, missing items earlier than later on the exam due to anxiety, missing syllabus
vs. textbook items, missing “second guess” items, etc.). Finally, occasionally a
student can demonstrate to the instructor that there is another way of interpreting
a concept that fits the conditions of the course materials, and as a result, there may
be credit given.
Finally, use study groups to assess preparation, but not to study. This is
clearly only an opinion, but study groups can be very inefficient, and are not likely to
do much good unless the members have studied hard prior to studying as a group.
The value of the group is to provide different ways of seeing the material, to test
knowledge with questions any given student would not ordinarily derive, and to
occasionally correct errors in thinking.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 6
Extra Credit
Rationale: Because the School of Communication seeks not only to distribute
knowledge through teaching, but also generate it through original research,
and because participation in such research provides important insights into
this process of knowledge generation, students in this class will be allowed
up to a total (not to exceed) 10 extra credit points during the semester, out
of the total number of points available for the course, based on participation
in School of Communication authorized research projects. Points will be
provided upon evidence of completed participation, with 2 points for each
half-hour of research participation. So, for example, if you engage in 3
projects accumulating to 1.5 credit hours, that would equate to 6 extra credit
points ( 3 half-hours x 2 points = 6), added to the total number of points for
the semester.
1. Extra Credit: Students may obtain extra credit from participation in
approved departmental research IF research opportunities are made
available. Extra credit cannot be guaranteed as it is dependent on the
NEED of research participants in departmental research. If extra credit
opportunities are made available, students can receive 2 points for each
half-hour of research participation (max. 10 points). Research
opportunities are presented on the SONA Research Recruitment System
which can be accessed through the School of Communication Research
Participation website, https://sites.google.com/site/commsdsuresearch
2. Eligibility: Only research projects approved and listed on the site listed
above are eligible.
3. Announcement of Opportunities: It is the students' responsibility to
avail themselves of such opportunities--ongoing announcements and
solicitations on the part of the instructor may or may not be made
during the semester as opportunities arise.
4. Availability of Opportunities: Research in a program ebbs and flows.
Participation is only available during the active windows of time
specified by each study. Opportunities for participation may or may not
be available in any particular semester, or at any particular time of the
semester.
5. Record of Participation: It is the responsibility of each individual
researcher to generate a valid list of student participation to return to
the instructor of record. It should be apparent in each research project
how the student's participation is to be recorded and evidenced.
6. Grade: No more credit is available than is indicated above—there are no
"additional" projects or sources for achieving extra credit in the course.
7. Ethics: Any attempt to falsify participation in research for the sake of
receiving unearned credit, or to surreptitiously claim credit for more
than one course, are forms of academic dishonesty, and will be a basis
for failure of a course and initiation of proceedings with the office of
Student Rights & Responsibilities.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 7
Risk, Crisis or
Disaster Case
Analysis Paper
Case or Communication Plan Paper Assignment
This assignment involves one of four options, involving either of two types of hazard
(threat/risk, or crisis/disaster), and either of two types of timeline: analysis (past) or
plan (future): a post-mortem case analysis (i.e., a past actual event) or a plan (i.e., a
prospective event):
1. Threat/Risk Communication Case Analysis
2. Crisis/Disaster Case Analysis
3. Threat/Risk Communication Plan
4. Crisis/Disaster Communication Plan
The paper will be 25-30 pages of text, not including tables, figures, bullet-point lists,
title page, and appendices. In addition, there will be an accompanying PowerPoint
(or Prezi) presentation that will be presented in class.
There are some components that are common to each type of paper, and
some unique components. Each paper will have:
 Title page: With a creative title for the project, the course number and title
(i.e., COMM 426: Risk and Crisis Communication), Semester/Year of the
report, a group name for the team authoring the report, an alphabetical list
(by last names) of the group members, their email addresses, and at the
bottom, a “Recommended APA citation for this report”. Title page should be
splashy, may need graphics or watermarks, borders, etc.
 Table of contents: A list of major headings and subheadings, with
pagination;
 Introduction: Provide either or both a: (a) narrative of an historical threat,
crisis, disaster, or risk that has occurred, and/or (b) an overview of the
significance and relevance of this type of threat, crisis, disaster or risk. This
section, like any introduction to any project, should engage the reader
regarding why it is important and relevant to analyze this topic. What
happened? What could or is likely to happen? How many people were or
could be affected? How were or would people affected? What were or
could be the collective personal, social, or historical costs and implications
of the event or process? Obviously, such claims should be well-referenced.
Finally, there should be a transition statement that overviews what the
remainder of the paper will attempt to achieve.
 Body: The substantive contents of the report;
 References: An APA “Reference List” of sources, with a minimum of 20
scholarly journal sources, and a minimum of 30 sources overall, directly
relevant to, and cited in, the contents of the report;
 Tables/Figures: Although not required, “Tables” and “Figures” represent
separate sections at the end of the report;
 Appendix: At the very end of the report, after Tables and Figures, there may
be other materials that make sense to include in the Appendices (e.g.,
checklists, contact lists, exemplary statements to press, etc.), but the first
appendix (Appendix 1) will be the PowerPoint presentation, with two slides
per page.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 8
The following are generic guidelines, but your paper may deviate in ways
that are called for by the particular event you are addressing and the direction your
team decides to take.
1. Risk Communication Case Analysis: This paper identifies an existing risk
communication campaign that has been attempted in the past, and may or
may not still be underway. For example, the strategies used to reduce
smoking in society, get vaccinations, engage in safe sex, or eat healthier all
represent possible topics for which various health campaigns have been
developed and attempted in the past. There are many more topics, so do
not feel limited by this list. This paper body proceeds through the following
major sections: (A) The Nature of the Risk (this section examines the
research on explicates the risk, which establishes the importance of the risk
to society); (B) Existing Strategies and/or Campaigns (this section examines
what types of communication campaigns, strategies, and tactics have been
attempted to influence risk and preparation behavior), (C) Analysis of
Efficacy (this section reviews the evidence of the adequacy or inadequacy of
the available research, and criticizes the relative efficacy of past strategies
and campaigns, and (D) Recommendations (this section provides a concise
but precise set of recommendations for how campaigns, strategies and/or
tactics should be reformulated for greater efficacy.
2. Crisis/Disaster Case Analysis: This paper identifies a past crisis (i.e., a
primarily human-caused communication problem—e.g., political or celebrity
scandal, transportation disaster due to miscommunication, financial crisis,
institutional apology for mistake or error, etc.), disaster (a natural crisis—
e.g., fires, tornados, floods, tsunamis, earthquake, famine, etc.), or some
combination (e.g., Fukushima was a natural disaster—tsunami, which was
exacerbated by a series of crises—in which humans made the problem
much worse). This paper body proceeds through the following major
sections: (A) The Nature of the crisis/disaster (this section examines the
research on explicates the crisis/disaster, which establishes the significance
of the event to society)-what happened, and who was affected, in what
ways?; (B) The Role of Communication (this section explicitly focuses on
how human communication contributed to, managed, or otherwise affected
the course of the crisis or disaster)—this section needs not just to recount
communication events, but use communication scholarship to help
interpret the strategies and tactics employed, (C) Analysis of Efficacy (this
section reviews the evidence of the adequacy or inadequacy of the available
research, and criticizes the relative efficacy of communication strategies and
tactics used to manage the crisis/disaster, and (D) Recommendations (this
section provides a concise but precise set of recommendations for how
communication campaigns, strategies and/or tactics should be reformulated
for greater efficacy in this type of crisis or disaster in the future.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 9
3. Risk Communication Plan: This paper identifies an area of risk (e.g.,
environmental protection, health promotion, food safety, public safety,
etc.), and should proceed through the following major sections: (A) The
Nature of the Risk (this section examines the research on explicates the risk,
which establishes the importance of the risk to society); (B) Relevant
Campaign Strategies (this section examines what types of communication
campaigns, strategies, and tactics have been attempted to influence some
analogous or similar type of risk and preparation behavior, or if none,
identifies relevant persuasion-relevant research to inform the development
of strategies or campaigns), (C) Plan Outline (this section specifies the
communication-based steps, procedures, primary contacts, publics,
stakeholders, and activities to be implemented to change public behavior),
and (D) Diffusion Recommendations (this section provides a concise but
precise set of recommendations for communication-based strategies to get
relevant target institutions or individuals to adopt the proposed plan).
4. Crisis/Disaster Communication Plan: This paper identifies an area of crisis
and/or disaster (e.g., political or celebrity scandal, transportation disaster,
pandemic, natural disaster, etc.), and should proceed through the following
major sections: (A) The Nature of the crisis/disaster (this section examines
the research on explicates the crisis/disaster, which establishes the
significance of the problem to relevant parties and/or society); (B) Relevant
Strategies (this section examines what types of communication campaigns,
strategies, and tactics have been attempted to influence some analogous or
similar type of risk and preparation behavior, or if none, identifies relevant
persuasion-relevant research to inform the development of strategies or
campaigns), (C) Plan Outline (this section specifies the communicationbased steps, procedures, primary contacts, publics, stakeholders, and
activities to be implemented to change public behavior), and (D) Diffusion
Recommendations (this section provides a concise but precise set of
recommendations for communication-based strategies to get relevant
target institutions or individuals to adopt the proposed plan).
Among the contents that are likely to show up in some way or another in each of
these papers is an analysis of how different communication media or channels
influence the event or strategies, and the key publics and stakeholders are involved,
and the strategic considerations of the influence of such media on such publics and
stakeholders. For example, if the risk, hazard, disaster, or crisis disproportionately
affects people of certain socioeconomic, racial, cultural, or gender classes, then the
role that certain strategies, media, language, and disability/accessibility factors play
need to be considered.
Important Considerations:
First, this is a group assignment, and everyone in the group will receive the
same grade. Each group will inform the instructor of their choices, and evolving
changes in their choices, regarding their topic and paper type selections. Your team
must reach consensus on which project to complete and every member must
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 10
contribute in an equally functional role in regard to the final product. If a team
member is slacking, the rest of the team needs to immediately notify me so we can
either resolve the problem or you can fire the member (fired members will be
reassigned to develop a sole-authored paper). Please do not wait long to deal with
team issues - be kind to your team members and give each person an opportunity
to complete a project by dealing with problems in a timely manner. There will be
no changes in membership after the ‘two-week’ notice; that is, within two weeks of
the due date of the assignment.
Second, and related, putting a person's name on a project that he or she did
not contribute to is academic dishonesty. All team members will share in the
penalty, regardless of how much work each one contributed.
Third, please be apprised that the entire project must reflect original work
of the team. There are a lot of communication plans, case studies, and risk and crisis
management documents floating about the web. You must not simply cut-andpaste materials from other sources into your plan. Your plan must be original work.
You, and your group, is held to the highest criteria of plagiarism and academic
honesty (see syllabus guidelines), and if any one of your team members plagiarizes,
the entire group will receive a zero for the assignment, and most likely fail the
course. Thus, among the assignment duties of your members should be that every
member’s contribution has another member to double-check that member’s work.
Related, the group may turn its report in early (before due date) and Turnitin will
provide an originality report, so if the group intends to be sure, it should plan to
submit a draft of its report early so there would be time to correct any issues of
plagiarism.
Fourth, these are general guidelines. To preserve the opportunity for group
creativity, it is important that as your group develops its analysis of its approach,
there may be numerous reasons to deviate from these guidelines. As long as you
discuss the details of how you intend to proceed, in a timely manner, and why it is
important to deviate from the general section guidelines, feel free to do so.
Fifth, lists, bullet-lists, tables, checklists, flow diagrams, and so forth can be
excellent resources, and will usually benefit the grade of the group. Such resources,
however, are relegated to the “Tables,” “Figures,” and “Appendices” section, and
should not comprise the 25-30 pages of the body of the final report.
Presentations:
The group presentation should be treated as if your group was contracted and paid
to produce the report, and this is your opportunity to “present” the report to the
contracting group, organization or agency. Everyone in the group should have a
speaking role, a “specialist title” (i.e., a job title indicating that person’s primary role
in authoring the report, e.g., “graphics specialist,” “archival researcher,” “topic
expert,” etc.). The amount of time available will depend on the class size and
schedule, and the exact amount of time will be announced in advance of the
presentations. As with the report, the entire group is graded on the entire
presentation, and each participant will receive the same grade as the group.
Grade Apportionment: The report = 80%, and the presentation = 20% of the grade.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 11
Overview
SDSU
Definitions
THE ACADEMIC DISHONESTY POLICY OF
THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION
In any case in which an instructor identifies evidence for charging a student
with violation of academic conduct standards or plagiarism, the presumption
will be with that instructor’s determination. The instructor(s) will confer with
the School Director to confirm the evidence. Once confirmed, the student will
be informed and presented with the evidence. Some conditions and terms
below clarify the School policy and procedure.
“Cheating: Cheating is defined as the act of obtaining or attempting to obtain
credit for academic work by the use of dishonest, deceptive, or fraud- ulent
means. Examples of cheating include, but are not limited to
 copying, in part or in whole, from another's test or other examination;
discussing answers or ideas relating to the answers on a test or other
examination without the permission of the instructor;
 obtaining copies of a test, an examination, or other course material
without the permission of the instructor;
 using notes, cheat sheets, or other devices considered inappropriate
under the prescribed testing condition;
 collaborating with another or others in work to be presented without the
permission of the instructor;
 falsifying records, laboratory work, or other course data;
 submitting work previously presented in another course, if contrary to the
rules of the course;
 altering or interfering with the grading procedures;
 plagiarizing, as defined; and
 knowingly and intentionally assisting another student in any of the above.
Plagiarism:
Plagiarism is defined as the act of incorporating ideas, words, or specific
substance of another, whether purchased, borrowed, or otherwise obtained,
and submitting same to the university as one's own work to fulfill academic
requirements without giving credit to the appropriate source. Plagiarism shall
include but not be limited to:
 submitting work, either in part or in whole, completed by another;
 omitting footnotes for ideas, statements, facts, or conclusions that belong
to another;
 omitting quotation marks when quoting directly from another, whether it
be a paragraph, sentence, or part thereof;
 close and lengthy paraphrasing of the writings of another;
 submitting another person's artistic works, such as musical compositions,
photographs, paintings, drawings, or sculptures; and
 submitting as one's own work papers purchased from research
companies.” (source: http://www.sa.sdsu.edu/srr/cheating-plagiarism.html)
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 12
Intellectual
contents
Intellectual contents include all forms of ‘text’ produced by another person or
persons. It includes: writings, course syllabi, course lectures and recordings of
lectures, visual information such as models, videos, lyrics, software, etc.
Intellectual
The syllabus, lectures and lecture outlines are personally-copyrighted
Property
intellectual property of the instructor, which means that any organized
recording for anything other than personal use, duplication, distribution, or
profit is a violation of copyright and fair use laws.
Proper source Proper attribution occurs by specifying the source of content or ideas. This is
attribution
done by (a) providing quotation marks around text, when directly quoted, and
(b) clearly designating the source of the text or information relied upon in an
assignment.
Self-plagiarism Students often practice some form of ‘double-dipping,’ in which they write on
a given topic across more than one course assignment. In general, there is
nothing wrong with double-dipping topics or sources, but there is a problem
with double-dipping exact and redundant text. It is common for scholars to
write on the same topic across many publication outlets; this is part of
developing expertise and the reputation of being a scholar on a topic.
Scholars, however, are not permitted to repeat exact text across papers or
publications except when noted and attributed, as this wastes precious
intellectual space with repetition and does a disservice to the particular
source of original presentation by ‘diluting’ the value of the original
presentation. Any time a writer simply ‘cuts-and-pastes’ exact text from
former papers into a new paper, it is a form of self-plagiarism. Consequently,
a given paper should never be turned in to multiple classes. Entire
paragraphs, or even sentences, should not be repeated word-for-word across
course assignments. Each new writing assignment is precisely that, a new
writing assignment, requiring new composition on the student’s part.
Solicitation for Any student who solicits any third party to write any portion of an assignment
ghost writing
for this class (whether for pay or not) violates the standards of academic
honesty. The penalty for solicitation (regardless of whether it can be
demonstrated the individual solicited wrote any sections of the assignment) is
F in the course and reporting to Student Rights and Responsibilities.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 13
Secondary
citations
Useful Aides
Secondary citation is not strictly a form of plagiarism, but in blatant forms, it
can present similar ethical challenges. A secondary citation is citing source A,
which in turn cites source B, but it is source B’s ideas or content that provide
the unique basis for the claims the student intends to make in the
assignment. For example, assume there is an article by Jones (2006) in the
student’s hands, in which there is a discussion or quotation of an article by
Smith (1998). Assume further that what Smith seems to be saying is very
important to the student’s analysis. In such a situation, the student should
always try to locate the original Smith source. In general, if an idea is
important enough to discuss in an assignment, it is important enough to
locate and cite the original source for that idea. There are several reasons for
these policies: (a) Authors sometimes commit citation errors, which might be
replicated without knowing it; (b) Authors sometimes make interpretation
errors, which might be ignorantly reinforced (c) Therefore, reliability of
scholarly activity is made more difficult to assure and enforce; (d) By relying
on only a few sources of review, the learning process is short-circuited, and
the student’s own research competencies are diminished, which are integral
to any liberal education; (e) By masking the actual sources of ideas, readers
must second guess which sources come from which citations, making the
readers’ own research more difficult; (f) By masking the origin of the
information, the actual source of ideas is misrepresented. Some suggestions
that assist with this principle:
 When the ideas Jones discusses are clearly attributed to, or unique to,
Smith, then find the Smith source and citation.
 When the ideas Jones is discussing are historically associated more with
Smith than with Jones, then find the Smith source and citation.
 In contrast, Jones is sometimes merely using Smith to back up what Jones
is saying and believes, and is independently qualified to claim, whether or
not Smith would have also said it; in such a case, citing Jones is sufficient.
 Never simply copy a series of citations at the end of a statement by Jones,
and reproduce the reference list without actually going to look up what
those references report—the only guarantee that claims are valid is for a
student to read the original sources of those claims.
A good place to learn about plagiarism is the tutorial on academic integrity at
http://plagiarism.org/plagiarism-101/overview/; and at
http://www.yorku.ca/tutorial/academic_integrity/caseintro.html
A good place to learn about APA writing and citation style is:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/
A good place to learn about making better arguments is:
http://www.readwritethink.org/files/resources/interactives/persuasion_map/
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 14
TurnItIn.com
The papers in this course will be submitted electronically in Word (preferably
2007, .docx) on the due dates assigned, and will require verification of
submission to Turnitin.com.
“Students agree that by taking this course all required papers may be subject
to submission for textual similarity review to TurnItIn.com for the detection
of plagiarism. All submitted papers will be included as source documents in
the TurnItIn.com reference database solely for the purpose of detecting
plagiarism of such papers. You may submit your papers in such a way that no
identifying information about you is included. Another option is that you may
request, in writing, that your papers not be submitted to TurnItIn.com.
However, if you choose this option you will be required to provide
documentation to substantiate that the papers are your original work and do
not include any plagiarized material” (source: language suggested by the CSU
General Counsel and approved by the Center for Student’s Rights and
Responsibilities at SDSU).
Consequences
 Course failure: Soliciting or reproducing a whole paper, paragraph, or
of Plagiarism or
large portions of unattributed materials without proper attribution,
Cheating
whether represented by: (a) multiple sentences, images, or portions of
images; or (b) by percentage of assignment length, will result in
assignment of an “F” in the course in which the infraction occurred, and a
report to the Center for Student Rights and Responsibilities (CSRR2).
 Assignment failure: Reproducing a sentence or sentence fragment with no
quotation marks, but with source citation, or subsets of images without
source attribution, will minimally result in an “F” on the assignment, and
may result in greater penalty, including a report to the CSRR, depending
factors noted below. In this instance, an “F” may mean anything between
a zero (0) and 50%, depending on the extent of infraction.
 Exacerbating conditions—Amount: Evidence of infraction, even if
fragmentary, is increased with a greater: (a) number of infractions; (b)
distribution of infractions across an assignment; or (c) proportion of the
assignment consisting of infractions.
 Exacerbating conditions—Intent: Evidence of foreknowledge and intent
to deceive magnifies the seriousness of the offense and the grounds for
official response. Plagiarism, whether ‘by accident’ or ‘by ignorance,’ still
qualifies as plagiarism—it is all students’ responsibility to make sure their
assignments are not committing the offense.
 Assistance: Evidence that the student was not the original author of the
work, due to soliciting the assistance or composition of another person or
persons.
 Exceptions: Any exceptions to these policies will be considered on a caseby-case basis, and only under exceptional circumstances.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE NO EXCUSES ALLOWED BASED ON IGNORANCE OF
WHAT CONSTITUTES PLAGIARISM, OR OF WHAT THIS POLICY IS
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 15
Comportment
The School of Communication, as a representative of SDSU and higher education,
expects students to engage in behavior that enhances the classroom learning
environment. The Instructor is responsible not only to the individual student, but to
the collective group of students who constitute a class. This means that behavior
disruptive to the classroom instruction is not tolerated. For the sake of the other
students, the instructor may be required to intervene under various circumstances.
Among the actions that are considered disruptive to the learning environment are:
 The use of cellphones and/or computers/laptops/tablets, whether for
conversation, correspondence, emailing, texting, tweeting, or other activities
(e.g., social media/Facebook), and when not directly related to the course and
its instructional objectives, materials, or contents;
 Side conversations or discussion in a manner distracting to the instructor or
fellow students;
 Ongoing or unrestricted interruption of instructor or fellow students, or
otherwise attempting to monopolize classroom time or discussion;
 Reading, sleeping, snoring, moving about, yelling, harassing, bullying, or
otherwise engaging in activities disrespectful of the instructor or students, or
unrelated to the course, materials, or contents;
 Entering late, leaving early, or leaving often during lecture, especially when in a
disruptive manner;
 Activity that in any way could be considered grossly inappropriate, threatening
or dangerous.
Certain other activities may be acceptable, but only with permission or by direction
of the Instructor, who retains the authority to specify relevant restrictions. Such
activities include:
 Filming, taping, or otherwise recording the class;
 Accessing the Internet during class;
 Use of computers/laptops/tablets may be permitted, but only if the students
are seated in the front row(s) of the classroom.
The Instructor reserves the right to establish additional reasonable expectations
deemed necessary to maintain optimal learning conduct in the classroom. Each
faculty member is the primary arbiter of classroom comportment. The faculty
member has the authority to enforce this policy in a manner deemed suitable to the
particular class in question. For example
 a student texting in class may be requested to turn the phone in to the
instructor for the remainder of the class, or
 a student using a laptop or IPAD to access Facebook may be asked to close and
shut down the technology for the remainder of the period.
Should repeat offenses occur, with fair warning, each faculty member will
determine fair and appropriate consequences for these behaviors. Should an
emergency occur or require monitoring, or if students observe violations of this
policy, they are encouraged to inform the instructor as soon as possible.
Finally, all students are governed by the SDSU policy on cheating and plagiarism. See
their coda at: http://csrr.sdsu.edu/cheating-plagiarism.html
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 16
THIS IS
SERIOUS!
PLAGIARISM IS A CRIME OF CONDUCT, NOT OF INTENT.
THIS COURSE WILL HAVE ZERO-TOLERANCE FOR PLAGIARISM!
WHY? BECAUSE:
1. A PLAGIARISM POLICY IS PUBLISHED IN THE UNIVERSITY CATALOG;
2. THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION PLAGIARISM POLICY, COMPLETE
WITH ELABORATED EXAMPLES, DEFINITIONS, AND CONSEQUENCES
FOR TYPES OF PLAGIARISM, IS:
a. ON THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION BLACKBOARD SITE,
b. ON THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION WEBSITE, AND
c. IN THE COURSE SYLLABUS;
3. A POWERPOINT LECTURE PRESENTED IN THIS COURSE ON “THE
ESSENTIALS” FURTHER SPECIFIES THE NATURE OF PLAGIARISM;
4. YOU CAN TURN IN YOUR PAPER BEFORE IT IS DUE, SEE ITS
ORIGINALITY RATING, FIX IT, AND TURN IT IN AGAIN BY
SUBMISSION DEADLINE;
5. FINALLY, YOU SHOULD SIMPLY KNOW THAT IT IS UNETHICAL AND A
‘HIGH CRIME’ IN ACADEME TO MISREPRESENT ANYONE’S WORDS
OR IDEAS, THROUGH IMPLICATION, WHETHER INTENDED OR NOT,
a. THAT THEY ARE YOUR OWN, OR
b. THEY ARE SOMEONE ELSE’S WHEN THEY ARE NOT.
A final analogy:
If you are taking a driving test to get a license,
And you run a stop sign while the instructor is in the car,
You fail the test then and there,
and must wait for an opportunity to re-take the exam another time.
So it is with plagiarism.
THEREFORE, THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR PLAGIARISM,
AND NO EXCUSE WILL BE ACCEPTED.
YOU ARE FOREWARNED.
IF YOU PLAGIARIZE, YOU WILL FAIL THIS COURSE.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 17
Source: http://plagiarism.org/plagiarism-101/overview
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 18
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Written communication is the development and expression of ideas in writing. Written communication involves learning to work in many genres
and styles. It can involve working with many different writing technologies, and mixing texts, data, and images. Written communication abilities
develop through iterative experiences across the curriculum.
WRITTEN
COMMUNICATION
COMPETENCY
CONTEXT OF AND
PURPOSE FOR
WRITING
INADEQUATE
0
Work does
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
MINIMAL
COMPETENCY
1
Demonstrates minimal attention to
context, audience, purpose, and to
the assigned tasks(s) (e.g.,
expectation of instructor or self as
audience).
MODERATE
COMPETENCY
2
Demonstrates awareness of
context, audience, purpose, and to
the assigned tasks(s) (e.g., begins
to show awareness of audience's
perceptions and assumptions).
CONTENT
DEVELOPMENT
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
Uses appropriate and relevant
content to develop simple ideas in
some parts of the work.
Uses appropriate and relevant
content to develop and explore
ideas through most of the work.
GENRE AND
DISCIPLINARY
CONVENTIONS
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
Attempts to use a consistent system
for basic organization and
presentation.
Follows expectations appropriate
to a specific discipline and/or
writing task(s) for basic
organization, content, and
presentation
SOURCES AND
EVIDENCE
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
Demonstrates an attempt to use
sources to support ideas in the
writing.
CONTROL OF SYNTAX
AND MECHANICS
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
Uses language that sometimes
impedes meaning because of errors
in usage.
Demonstrates an attempt to use
credible and/or relevant sources to
support ideas that are appropriate
for the discipline and genre of the
writing.
Uses language that generally
conveys meaning to readers with
clarity, although writing may
include some errors.
Displays general compliance with
APA content, format, pagination,
titles/headings, running head,
emphases, and reference style, but
misses compliance in four to five
specific rules.
APA FORMAT AND
COMPLIANCE
Displays general compliance with
APA content, format, pagination,
titles/headings, running head,
emphases, and reference style, but is
either occasionally inconsistent or
noncompliant.
ADVANCED
COMPETENCY
3
Demonstrates adequate
consideration of context,
audience, and purpose and a
clear focus on the assigned
task(s) (e.g., the task aligns with
audience, purpose, and context).
Uses appropriate, relevant, and
compelling content to explore
ideas within the context of the
discipline and shape the whole
work.
CAPSTONE
COMPETENCY
4
Demonstrates a thorough
understanding of context, audience,
and purpose that is responsive to the
assigned task(s) and focuses all
elements of the work.
Demonstrates consistent use of
important conventions particular
to a specific discipline and/or
writing task(s), including
organization, content,
presentation, and stylistic
choices
Demonstrates consistent use of
credible, relevant sources to
support ideas that are situated
within the discipline and genre
of the writing.
Uses straightforward language
that generally conveys meaning
to readers. The language in the
portfolio has few errors.
Displays general compliance
with APA content, format,
pagination, titles/headings,
running head, emphases, and
reference style, but misses
compliance in 2 to 3 specific
rules.
Demonstrates detailed attention to
and successful execution of a wide
range of conventions particular to a
specific discipline and/or writing task
(s) including organization, content,
presentation, formatting, and stylistic
choices
Demonstrates skillful use of highquality, credible, relevant sources to
develop ideas that are appropriate for
the discipline and genre of the
writing
Uses graceful language that skillfully
communicates meaning to readers
with clarity and fluency, and is
virtually error-free.
Displays nearly complete or
complete compliance with APA
content, format, pagination,
titles/headings, running head,
emphases, and reference style.
Uses appropriate, relevant, and
compelling content to illustrate
mastery of the subject, conveying the
writer's understanding, and shaping
the whole work.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 19
ORAL COMMUNICATION RUBRIC
Oral communication is a prepared, purposeful presentation designed to increase knowledge, to foster understanding, or to promote
change in the listeners' attitudes, values, beliefs, or behaviors.
INADEQUATE
0
Work does
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
MINIMAL
COMPETENCY
1
Specific introduction and
conclusion, sequenced material
within the body, and transitions) is
not observable within the
presentation.
MODERATE
COMPETENCY
2
Specific introduction and
conclusion, sequenced material
within the body, and transitions) is
intermittently observable within
the presentation.
LANGUAGE CHOICES
ARE…
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
unclear and minimally support the
effectiveness of the presentation.
Language in presentation is not
appropriate to audience
DELIVERY TECHNIQUES
(i.e,.,…
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
SUPPORTING MESSAGE;
MATERIALS/EVIDENCE/
RESEARCH (i.e.
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
CENTRAL MESSAGE…
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
posture, gesture, eye contact, and
vocal expressiveness) detract from
the understandability of the
presentation, and speaker appears
uncomfortable.
explanations, examples,
illustrations, statistics, analogies,
quotations from relevant
authorities) make insufficient
reference to information or analysis
that minimally supports the
presentation or establishes the
presenter's credibility/ authority on
the topic.
can be deduced, but is not
explicitly stated in the presentation.
mundane and commonplace and
partially support the effectiveness
of the presentation. Language in
presentation is appropriate to
audience.
posture, gesture, eye contact, and
vocal expressiveness) make the
presentation understandable, and
speaker appears tentative.
ORAL COMMUNICATION
COMPETENCY
ORGANIZATIONAL
PATTERN
DEMONSTRATES…
explanations, examples,
illustrations, statistics, analogies,
quotations from relevant
authorities) make appropriate
reference to information or
analysis that partially supports the
presentation or establishes the
presenter's credibility/authority on
the topic.
is basically understandable but is
not often repeated and is not
memorable.
ADVANCED
COMPETENCY
3
Specific introduction and
conclusion, sequenced material
within the body, and transitions)
is clearly and consistently
observable within the
presentation.
thoughtful and generally support
the effectiveness of the
presentation. Language in
presentation is appropriate to
audience., sequenced
posture, gesture, eye contact,
and vocal expressiveness) make
the presentation interesting, and
speaker appears comfortable.
CAPSTONE
COMPETENCY
4
Specific introduction and conclusion,
sequenced material within the body,
and transitions) is clearly and
consistently observable and
is skillful and makes the content of
the presentation cohesive.
imaginative, memorable, and
compelling, and enhance the
effectiveness of the presentation.
Language in presentation is
appropriate to audience.
posture, gesture, eye contact, and
vocal expressiveness) make the
presentation compelling, and speaker
appears polished and confident.
explanations, examples,
illustrations, statistics, analogies,
quotations from relevant
authorities) make appropriate
reference to information or
analysis that generally supports
the presentation or establishes
the presenter's credibility/
authority on the topic.
is clear and consistent with the
supporting material.
explanations, examples, illustrations,
statistics, analogies, quotations from
relevant authorities) reveal a variety
of approaches to making appropriate
reference to information or analysis
that significantly supports the
presentation or establishes the
presenter's credibility/authority on
the topic.
is compelling (precisely stated,
appropriately repeated, memorable,
and strongly supported.)
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 20
RISK/CRISIS/DISASTER ANALYSIS/PLAN RUBRIC
Oral communication is a prepared, purposeful presentation designed to increase knowledge, to foster understanding, or to promote
change in the listeners' attitudes, values, beliefs, or behaviors.
COMMUNICATION
ANALYSIS/PLAN
COMMUNICATION
FOCUS
RESEARCH
GROUNDING
COMMUNICATION &
THEORY GROUNDING
COVERAGE & DETAIL
INADEQUATE
0
Work does
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
Work does
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
not meet
minimal
competency
benchmark
MINIMAL
COMPETENCY
1
Report diverges into a variety of
structural, procedural, or historical
aspects of the topic that have
relatively little to do with
communication processes and
strategies.
Research is generic, non-scholarly,
and/or has little connection to
communication literatures or
theories.
MODERATE
COMPETENCY
2
Report examines some
communication processes and
strategies.
ADVANCED
COMPETENCY
3
Report examines several
communication processes and
strategies.
CAPSTONE
COMPETENCY
4
Report almost entirely examines
communication processes and
strategies.
Research is partially or
occasionally grounded in
communication research, and/or
scholarly research.
Research is mostly grounded in
scholarly communication
research
Research is almost entirely grounded
in scholarly communication research.
Theories are missing, or from
disciplines having little grounding
in, or connection to, communication.
Communication-relevant theory is
clearly referenced in a manner
that partially frames the content.
Report examines only narrow
aspects of the risk/crisis/disaster
management process.
Report examines several aspects
of the risk/crisis/disaster
management process.
Communication-relevant theory
or theories are referenced in a
manner that thoroughly frames
the content.
Report examines most aspects
of the risk/crisis/disaster
management process.
Communication-relevant theory or
theories are referenced in a manner
that thoroughly and heuristically
frames the content.
Report examines all relevant aspects
of the risk/crisis/disaster
management process.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 21
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 22
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
PLAN CHECKLIST
Planning, research, training and evaluation
Does your plan have the following elements:
 Designated line and staff responsibilities for the public information team
 Information verification and clearance/approval procedures
 Agreements on information release authorities (who releases what/when/how)
 Regional and local media contact list (including after‐hours news desks)
 Procedures to coordinate with your organization’s response teams (if applicable)
 Designated spokespersons
 Contact numbers for emergency information partners (e.g. Mayor’s office, Governor’s public
affairs officer, local FBI public information special agent in charge, local or regional department
of agriculture or veterinarian public information officers, Red Cross and other nongovernment
organizations)
 After hours contact numbers for your organization’s response team (if applicable)
 Agreements/procedures to join the joint information center of the emergency operations
center (if activated and applicable)
 Procedures to secure needed resources (space, equipment, people) to operate your public
information operation 24/7 if needed
 Identified channels of communication for public, stakeholders, partners, etc.
 Have you coordinated your planning with the community or state emergency operations
center (if applicable)
 Have you coordinated your planning with other response organizations
 Have designated spokespersons received media training and risk communication training
 Do designated spokespersons understand emergency crisis/risk communication principles to
build trust and credibility
Partner/stakeholder information:
 Establishes communication protocols based on prearranged agreements with identified
partners and stakeholders
 Arranges regular partner briefings and updates
 Solicits feedback and responds to partner information requests and inquiries
 Oversees partner/stakeholder monitoring systems and reports (e.g., analyzing environment
and trends to determine needed messages, determining what misinformation needs to be
corrected, identifying concerns, interests, and needs arising from the crisis and the response)
 Helps organize and facilitate official meetings to provide information and receive input from
partners or stakeholders
 Develops and maintains lists and call logs of legislators and special interest groups
 Responds to legislator/special interest groups requests and inquiries
Direct public information:
 Manages the mechanisms to respond to public requests for information directly from the
organization by telephone, in writing or by e‐mail
 Oversees public information monitoring systems and reports (e.g., analyzing environment and
trends to determine needed messages, determining what misinformation needs to be
corrected, identifying concerns, interests, and needs arising from the crisis and the response)
 Activates or participates in the telephone information line
 Activates or participates in the public e‐mail response system
 Activates or participates in the public correspondence response system
 Organizes and manage emergency response Web sites and Web pages
 Establishes and maintain links to other emergency response Web sites
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 23
YES
NO
YES
NO
Source:
PLAN CHECKLIST, Cont.
Messages and Audiences
 Have you identified special population (e.g. elderly, hearing impaired, limited English
proficiency, developmentally disabled, etc)?
 Have you identified your organization’s partners who should receive direct information and
updates from your organization?
 Have you identified all stakeholder organizations or populations who you believe should
receive direct communication? These are groups or organizations that you believe have an
active interest in monitoring activities and to whom you are most directly accountable, other
than official chain of command.
 Have you planned ways to reach people according to their reactions to the incident? Are
messages, messengers, and methods of delivery sensitive to all types of audiences in your area
of responsibility?
 Are there mechanisms/resources in place to create messages for the media and public under
severe time constraints, including methods to clear these messages with the emergency
response operations of your organization (including cross clearance)?
 Have you identified how you will perform media evaluation, content analysis, and public
information call analysis in real time during an emergency to ensure adequate audience
feedback?
• Topic factsheet
• Public Q/As
• Partner Q/As
• Serves as liaison from the organization to the JIC and back
Content and material for public health emergencies:
 Develops and establishes mechanisms to rapidly receive information from the EOC regarding
the public health emergency
 Translates EOC situation reports and meeting notes into information appropriate for public
and partner needs
 Works with subject matter experts to create situation‐specific factsheets, Q/As, and updates
 Compiles information on possible public health emergency topics for release when needed
 Tests messages and materials for cultural and language requirements of special populations
 Receives input from other communication team members regarding content and message
needs
 Uses analysis from media, public and partner monitoring systems, and reports (e.g.,
environmental and trend analysis to determine needed messages, what misinformation needs
to be corrected, identify concerns, interests and needs arising from the crisis and the response)
to identify additional content requirements and material development
 Lists contracts/cooperative agreements/consultants currently available to support emergency
public/private information dissemination
http://www.preped.org/resources/crisiscommunication-workbook.pdf
Center for Preparedness Education. Joint endeavor between Creighton University Medical Center
and University of Nebraska Medical Center: http://www.preped.org/
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 24
SAMPLE CRISIS/DISASTER COMMUNICATION PLAN TEMPLATES
Crisis Communication Plan: A PR Blue Print, by Sandra K. Clawson Freeo
Short Web address for this page: NewsPlace.org/crisis
(http://www3.niu.edu/newsplace/crisis.htmlhttp://www3.niu.edu/newsplace/crisis.html)
 Introduction
 The Crisis Communication Team
 Positioning
 Designated Spokesperson
 Media Policies and Procedures
 Practicing Tough Questions
 Prepared Statements
 Sample News Release
 Collateral Materials
 Key Audiences
 Contact Log
 Speaker's Presentations
 Handling Media Interviews
 Recommended Books and Web Sites
Crisis Communication Planning Workbook—BioPreparedness
http://www.preped.org/resources/crisiscommunication-workbook.pdf
 Assess the Crisis
 Identify Audiences
 Communication Materials
 Communication Channels
 Monitoring
 Needed Resources
 Post Event Evaluation
 Make Sure the Plan Works as Intended
 PIO Role in Incident Command
 Final Checklists
CDC Crisis Communication Plan:
http://www.orau.gov/cdcynergy/erc/CERC%20Course%20Materials/Instructor%20PPT%20Slides/Crisis%
20Communication%20Plan.pdf
1. Signed endorsement from director
2. Designated staff responsibilities
3. Information verification and clearance/release procedures
4. Agreements on information release authorities
5. Media contact list
6. Procedures to coordinate with public health organization response teams
7. Designated spokespersons
8. Emergency response team after-hours contact numbers
9. Emergency response information partner contact numbers
10. Partner agreements (like joining the local EOC’s JIC)
11. Procedures/plans on how to get resources you’ll need
12. Pre-identified vehicles of information dissemination
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 25
A HIGHLY SELECTED LIST OF POTENTIALLY HELPFUL OUTSIDE READINGS
Some Key Government Souces:
Summary of Key RSH Documents by Agency
Document Title
Web Address
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/emergencypreparedness/
Emergency Preparedness and Response
Standards
http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_tab
OSHA 29CFT 1910.120q
HAZWOPER
le=STANDARDS&p_id=9765#1910.120(q)
http://www.osha.gov/html/faq-hazwoper.html
Year
NA
NA
NA
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
National Preparedness Guidelines
Target Capabilities List
http://www.dhs.gov/files/publications/gc_1189788256647.shtm
http://www.doh.state.fl.us/DEMO/BPR/PDFs/20112013PHHP_Strategic_Plan.pdf
http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/gc_1218226975457.shtm
Science and Technology Standards -- PPE
https://hseep.dhs.gov/pages/1001_HSEEP7.aspx
Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation
Program (HSEEP)
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/
National Response Framework (NRF)
Website
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nrf/nrf-support-wsh.pdf
(NRF) Worker Safety and Health Support
Annex
http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/index.shtm
National Incident Management System
(NIMS)
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/about/divisions/npd/CPG_101_V2.pdf
Developing and Maintaining Emergency
Operations Plans
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
Responder Safety and Health Guidance Documents
http://www.rand.org/pubs/conf_proceedings/CF176.html
Protecting Emergency Responders: Lessons
Learned from Terrorist Attacks Vol. 1
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1646.html
Protecting Emergency Responders, Vol. 2:
Community Views of Safety and Health
Risks and Personal Protection Needs
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2004-144/
Protection Emergency Responders, Vol. 3:
Safety Management in Disaster and
Terrorism Response
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG425.html
Personal Protective Equipment Guidelines
for Structural Collapse Events, Vol. 4
US Department of Health and Human Services (DHS)
http://www.phe.gov/preparedness/mcm/pages/default.aspx
Medical Countermeasures
Center for Disease Control
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/adult-schedule.htm
2012 Immunization Schedule
Florida Department of Health (FDOH)
http://www.doh.state.fl.us/DEMO/BPR/PDFs/IOP_135-01Division of Emergency Medical Operations
11_DEMO_Employee_Immunizations.pdf
Employee Immunizations IOP 135-01-11
http://dohiws/Divisions/Disease_Control/immune/TAGs/TAG_35
Bureau of Immunization – Technical
0_11_Staff_Immunization_Guide.pdf
Assistance Guideline TAG 350-11-11
http://www.doh.state.fl.us/demo/bpr/pdfs/DEMO_Employee_Imm
Implementing the DEMO “Employee
unizations.pdf
Immunizations” Internal Operating
Procedure
2007
2007
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2010
2002
2003
2004
2006
NA
2012
2011
2011
2011
Source: http://www.floridahealth.gov/preparedness-and-response/disaster-response-resources/responder-safety- health/_documents/ respondersafety-resources.pdf
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 26
Selected Useful Sites:
 http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/riskcomm/tools.shtm
 http://www.michigan.gov/documents/safeschools/MI_Ready_Schools_Emergency_Plann
ing_Toolkit_370277_7.pdf
 http://www.preped.org/resources/crisiscommunication-workbook.pdf
 http://www.ready.gov/risk-assessment
 http://www.fema.gov/pdf/about/divisions/npd/CPG_101_V2.pdf
 http://www.floridahealth.gov/preparedness-and-response/trainingexercise/_documents/trainer-toolkit.pdf
 http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/courseOverview.aspx?code=is-29
 http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/courseOverview.aspx?code=IS-42
 http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/is242a.asp
Recommended General Readings:
Barrett, M. S. (2005). Spokespersons and message control: How the CDC lost credibility during the
Anthrax crisis. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 6, 59-68.
Benoit, W. L. (1995). Accounts, excuses, and apologies: A theory of image restoration strategies.
Albany, NY: State University of New York.
Coombs, W. T. (2007). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing, and responding (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Covello, V. T. (2003). Best practices in public health risk and crisis communication. Journal of
Health Communication, 8, 5-8.
Covello, V., & Sandman, P. M. (2001). Risk communication: Evolution and revolution. In A. Wolbarst
(ed.), Solutions to an environment in peril (pp. 164-178). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.
Retrieved: www.psandman.com/articles/covello.htm.
Drabek, T. E., & McEntire, D. A. (2003). Emergent phenomena and the sociology of disaster:
Lessons, trends and opportunities from the research literature. Disaster Prevention
and Management, 12, 97-112.
Falkheimer, J., & Heide, M. (2006). Multicultural crisis communication: Towards a social
constructionist perspective. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 14, 180189.
Fischer, H. W. (1998). Response to disaster: Fact versus fiction & its perpetuation, the
sociology of disaster (2nd ed.). New York: University Press of America.
Foster, J., Andersen, P. A., McBride, J., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2004, June). Disaster/terrorism
preparedness media and assessment plan (pp. 1-119). Report to San Diego County
Health and Human Services Department.
Garnett, J. L., & Kouzmin, A. (2007). Communicating throughout Katrina: Competing and
complementary conceptual lenses on crisis communication. Public Administration
Review, 67, 171-188.
González-Herrero, A., & Pratt, C. B. (1996). An integrated symmetrical model for crisiscommunications management. Journal of Public Relations Research, 8, 79-105.
Hale, J. E., Dulek, R. E., & Hale, D. P. (2005). Crisis response communication challenges:
Building theory from qualitative data. Journal of Business Communication, 42, 112134.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 27
Hornik, R. C. (Ed.). (2002). Public health communication: Evidenced for behavior change.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Huang, Y-H. (2006). Crisis situations, communication strategies, and media coverage: A
multicase study revisiting the communicative response model. Communication
Research, 33, 180-205.
Ice, J. I., & Petersen, D. (2002). Considerations in risk communication: A digest of risk communication as
a risk management tool. Washington, D.C.: National Risk Management Research Laboratory,
Office of Research and Development.
Jacobs, G. (2000). What’s in a crisis? A critical look at the field of crisis communication. Journal of
Research and Problem Solving in Organizational Communication, 2, 225-235.
Kittler, A. F., Hobbs, J., Volk, L. A., Kreps, G. L., & Bates, D. W. (2004). The Internet as a vehicle to
communicate health information during a public health emergency: A survey analysis involving
the anthrax scare of 2001. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 6 (1):e8, 1-7. Retrieved:
www.jmir.org/2004/1/e8/
Lasker, R. D. (2004). Redefining readiness: Terrorism planning through the eyes of the public. New York:
New York Academy of Medicine.
Lerbinger, O. (2012). The crisis manager: Facing disasters, conflicts, and failures (2nd ed.). New York,
NY: Routledge. ISBN: 978-0-415-89228-5
Lindell, M. K., & Perry, R. W. (2003). Communicating environmental risk in multiethnic communities.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lyon, L., & Cameron, G. T. (2004). A relational approach examining the interplay of prior reputation
and immediate response to a crisis. Journal of Public Relations Research, 16, 213-241.
Manoj, B. S., & Baker, A. H. (2007). Communication challenges in emergency response.
Communications of the ACM, 50 (3), 51-53.
McDonald, M. (2005, November). Stages in the evolution of disaster risk communication: how
knowledge, science and interactive technologies are transforming communication in high risk,
low trust environments. Plenary presentation at the National Communication Association
Convention, Boston, MA.
McHale, J. P., Zompetti, J. P., & Moffitt, M. A. (2007). A hegemonic model of crisis
communication: Truthfulness and repercussions for free speech in Kasky v. Nike.
Journal of Business Communication, 44, 374-402.
Norris, F. H., Friedman, M. J., Watson, P. J., Byrne, C. M., Diaz, E., & Kaniasty, K., (2002).
60,000 disaster victims speak: Part I. An empirical review of the empirical literature.
Psychiatry, 65, 207-239.
O’Brien, P. W. (2003). Risk communication and public warning response to the September 11th attack
on the World Trade Center. In Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center,
Public Entity Risk Institute, and Institute for Civil Infrastructure Systems (Eds.), Beyond
September 11th: An account of post-disaster research (Special Publication No. 39, pp. 355-372).
Boulder, CO: University of Colorado.
O’Hair, D. & Heath, R. (Eds.). (2009). Handbook of Risk and Crisis Communication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates. ISBN: 978-0-8058-5777-1
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2003). Crisis communication plan. 18-19. Washington
DC: U.S. Department of Labor.
Paton, D. & Jackson, D (2002) Developing disaster management capability: An assessment
centre approach. Disaster Prevention and Management, 11, 115-122
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 28
Paton, D. & Johnson, D. Disasters and communities: Vulnerability, resilience and
preparedness. Disaster Preparedness and Management, 10, 270-277.
Paton, D. (2003). Disaster preparedness: A social-cognitive perspective. Disaster Prevention and
Management, 12, 210-216.
Payne, J. G., & Schulte, S. K. (2003). Mass media, public health, and achieving health
literacy. Journal of Health Communication, 8, 124-125.
Pollard, W. E. (2003). Public perceptions of information sources concerning bioterrorism
before and after anthrax attacks: An analysis of national survey data. Journal of Health
Communication, 8, 93-103.
Reynolds, B., & Seeger, M. W. (2005). Crisis and emergency risk communication as an
integrative model. Journal of Health Communication, 10, 43-55.
Rudman, W. (2003) Emergency Responders: Drastically underfunded, dangerously
underprepared. Council on Foreign Relations: Washington DC.
Samp, J. A. (2006). Identity-processing orientations and the importance of single and
multiple communication goals for managing problematic events. Communication
Research Reports, 23, 101-110.
Schneider, M. E. (1995). Flirting with disaster: Public management in crisis situations.
Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Schuster, M. A., Stein, B. D., Jaycox, L. H., Collins, R. L., Marshall, G. N., Elliott, M. N., Zhou,
A. J., Kanouse, D. E., Morrison, J. L., & Berry, S.H. (2001). A national survey of stress
reactions after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. New England Journal of
Medicine, 345, 1507-1512
Seeger, M. W., & Reynolds, B. (2008). Crisis communication and the public health: Integrative
approaches and new imperative. In M. W. Seeger, T. L. Sellnow & R. R. Ulmer (Eds.). Crisis
communication and public health (pp. 3-22). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton
Seeger, M. W., Sellnow, T. L., & Ulmer, R. R. (Eds.). (2008). Crisis communication and public health.
Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
Sobo, E. J., & Seid, M. (2003). Cultural issues in health services delivery: What kind fo “competence” is
needed, and from whom? Annals of Behavioral Sciences and Medical Education, 9, 97-100.
Sturges, D. L. (1994). Communicating through crisis: A strategy for organizational survival.
Communication Management Quarterly, 7, 297-316.
Telleen, S., & Martin, E. (2002). Improving information access for public health professionals. Journal of
Medical Systems, 26, 529-543.
Tierney, K. J., Lindell, M. K., & Perry, R. W. (2001). Facing the unexpected: Disaster preparedness and
response in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press.
Ulmer, R. R., Sellnow, T. L., & Seeger, M. W. (2006). Effective crisis communication: Moving
from crisis to opportunity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Venette, S. J. (2006). Special section introduction: Best practices in risk and crisis
communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34, 229-231.
Walaski, P. F. (2011). Risk and crisis communications: Methods and messages. New York, NY: Wiley.
ISBN: 978-0-470-59273-1
Weinstein, N. D. (1987). Cross-hazard consistencies: Conclusion about self-protective behavior. In N. D.
Weinstein (Ed.), Taking care: Understanding and encouraging self-protective behavior (pp. 325335). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health
campaigns. Health Education & Behavior, 27, 591-615.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 29
Witte, K., Meyer, G., & Martell, D. (2001). Effective health risk messages: A step-by-step guide.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Xanthia, J., Hawkins, A., & Rowel, R. (2007). An assessment of the cultural appropriateness of
emergency preparedness communication for low income minorities. Journal of Homeland
Security and Emergency Management, 4, http://www.bepress.com/jhsem/vol4/iss3/13/.
Zaremba, A. J. (2010). Crisis communication: Theory and practice. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. ISBN: 9780-7656-2052-1
INCIDENT COMMAND SYSTEMS:
Baggerly, J. (2006). Preparing play therapists for disaster response: Principles and procedures.
International Journal Of Play Therapy, 15(2), 59-81. doi:10.1037/h0088915
Bigley, G. A., & Roberts, K. H. (2001). The incident command system: High-reliability organizing
for complex and volatile task environments. Academy Of Management Journal, 44(6),
1281-1299. doi:10.2307/3069401
Blessman, J., Skupski, J., Jamil, M., Jamil, H., Bassett, D., Wabeke, R., & Arnetz, B. (2007).
Barriers to at-home-preparedness in public health employees: Implications for disaster
preparedness training. Journal Of Occupational And Environmental Medicine, 49(3), 318326. doi:10.1097/JOM.0b013e31803225c7
Crichton, M. T., Lauche, K. K., & Flin, R. R. (2005). Incident Command Skills in the Management
of an Oil Industry Drilling Incident: A Case Study. Journal Of Contingencies And Crisis
Management, 13(3), 116-128. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5973.2005.00466.x
Fojt, D. F., Cohen, M. D., & Wagner, J. (2008). A systematic, integrated behavioral health
response to disaster. International Journal Of Emergency Mental Health, 10(3), 219-224.
Heath, R. (1998). Dealing with the complete crisis--The crisis management shell structure.
Safety Science, 30(1-2), 139-150. doi:10.1016/S0925-7535(98)00042-3
Joung, W., Hesketh, B., & Neal, A. (2006). Using 'War Stories' to Train for Adaptive Performance:
Is it Better to Learn from Error or Success?. Applied Psychology: An International Review,
55(2), 282-302. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2006.00244.x
Lutz, L. D., & Lindell, M. K. (2008). Incident command system as a response model within
emergency operation centers during Hurricane Rita. Journal Of Contingencies And Crisis
Management, 16(3), 122-134. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5973.2008.00541.x
McLennan, J., Holgate, A. M., Omodei, M. M., & Wearing, A. J. (2006). Decision making
effectiveness in wildfire incident management teams. Journal Of Contingencies And
Crisis Management, 14(1), 27-37. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5973.2006.00478.x
Moynihan, D. P. (2009). From intercrisis to intracrisis learning. Journal Of Contingencies And
Crisis Management, 17(3), 189-198. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5973.2009.00579.x
Nickerson, A. B., Brock, S. E., & Reeves, M. A. (2006). School crisis teams within an Incident
Command System. California School Psychologist, 1163-72.
Njå, O., & Rake, E. L. (2008). An essay on research methodology: An alternative approach to
incident command research through participatory action research. Journal Of
Contingencies And Crisis Management, 16(2), 91-100. doi:10.1111/j.14685973.2008.00537.x
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 30
Rake, E. L., & Njå, O. (2009). Perceptions and performances of experienced incident
commanders. Journal Of Risk Research, 12(5), 665-685.
doi:10.1080/13669870802604281
SCANDALS:
Achter, P. J. (2000). Narrative, intertexuality, and apologia in contemporary political scandals.
Southern Communication Journal, 65(4), 318.
Arvidsson, S. (2010). Communication of corporate social responsibility: A Study of the Views of
Management Teams in Large Companies. Journal Of Business Ethics, 96(3), 339-354.
doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0469-2
Barth, T. (2010). Crisis management in the Catholic church: Lessons for public administrators.
Public Administration Review, 70(5), 780-791. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02205.x
Beck, G., & Kropp, C. (2011). Infrastructures of risk: A mapping approach towards controversies
on risks. Journal Of Risk Research, 14(1), 1-16. doi:10.1080/13669877.2010.505348
Berinsky, A. J., Hutchings, V. L., Mendelberg, T., Shaker, L., & Valentino, N. A. (2011). Sex and
race: Are Black candidates more likely to be disadvantaged by sex scandals?. Political
Behavior, 33(2), 179-202. doi:10.1007/s11109-010-9135-8
Brackenridge, C. H., Bishopp, D., Moussalli, S., & Tapp, J. (2008). The characteristics of sexual
abuse in sport: A multidimensional scaling analysis of events described in media reports.
International Journal Of Sport And Exercise Psychology, 6(4), 385-406.
Campbell, R. (1999). Media scandals. Journal Of Communication, 49(4), 186.
Carstairs, C. (2003). The wide world of doping: Drug scandals, natural bodies, and the business
of sports entertainment. Addiction Research & Theory, 11(4), 263-281.
doi:10.1080/1606635031000135659
Cedrone, M. J. (2004). Using a Negotiations Lens to Examine the American Catholic Church's
Response to the Clergy Sex-Abuse Scandal. Negotiation Journal, 20(1), 65-77.
doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.2004.00006.x
Connor, J. M., & Mazanov, J. (2010). The inevitability of scandal: Lessons for sponsors and
administrators. International Journal Of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 11(3), 212-220.
Dixon, M. A. (2004). Silencing the Lambs: The Catholic Church's Response to the 2002 Sexual
Abuse Scandal. Journal Of Communication & Religion, 27(1), 63-86.
Fainaru-Wada, M. (2011). Serving the Public Interest When the Public Does Not Want to Know.
Journal Of Mass Media Ethics, 26(1), 74-78. doi:10.1080/08900523.2010.497041
Gamson, J. (2001). Jessica Hahn, Media Whore: Sex Scandals and Female Publicity. Critical
Studies In Media Communication, 18(2), 157.
Hanstad, D. (2008). Drug scandal and organizational change within the International Ski
Federation: A figurational approach. European Sport Management Quarterly, 8(4), 379398. doi:10.1080/16184740802461645
Hemmens, C. (2008). American skin: The Duke lacrosse rape scandal and the intersection of
race, class, gender, and injustice. American Journal Of Criminal Justice, 33(2), 297-306.
doi:10.1007/s12103-008-9037-z
Huge, M., Glynn, C. J., & Jeong, I. (2006). A RELATIONSHIP-BASED APPROACH TO
UNDERSTANDING THIRD-PERSON PERCEPTIONS. Journalism & Mass Communication
Quarterly, 83(3), 530-546.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 31
Jacobs, M. D. (2009). Review of 'Secrets, sex, and spectacle: The rules of scandal in Japan and
the United States'. American Journal Of Sociology, 114(5), 1564-1566.
doi:10.1086/600015
Kahuni, A., Rowley, J., & Binsardi, A. (2009). Guilty by association: Image ‘spill-over’ in corporate
co-branding. Corporate Reputation Review, 12(1), 52-63. doi:10.1057/crr.2009.1
Len-Rios, M. E. (2010). Image Repair Strategies, Local News Portrayals and Crisis Stage: A Case
Study of Duke University's Lacrosse Team Crisis. International Journal Of Strategic
Communication, 4(4), 267-287. doi:10.1080/1553118X.2010.515534
Maule, L. S., & Goidel, R. K. (2003). Adultery, drugs, and sex: An experimental investigation of
individual reactions to unethical behavior by public officials. The Social Science Journal,
40(1), 65-78. doi:10.1016/S0362-3319(02)00259-8
Mazanov, J., & Connor, J. (2010). The role of scandal and corruption in sports marketing and
sponsorship. International Journal Of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 11(3),
McCartha, M., & Strauman, E. C. (2009). Fallen Stars and Strategic Redemption: A Narrative
Analysis of the National Enquirer. Florida Communication Journal, 37(2), 71-82.
Mei, J., Bansal, N., & Pang, A. (2010). New media: A new medium in escalating crises?.
Corporate Communications, 15(2), 143-155. doi:10.1108/13563281011037919
Richardson, L. r., & Freeman, P. K. (2003). Issue salience and gender differences in
congressional elections, 1994-1998. The Social Science Journal, 40(3), 401-417.
doi:10.1016/S0362-3319(03)00038-7
Sex Scandal Science in Hong Kong. (2009). Sexualities, 12(5), 605-612.
doi:10.1177/1363460709340370
Sikes, P. (2006). Scandalous stories and dangerous liaisons: When female pupils and male
teachers fall in love. Sex Education, 6(3), 265-280. doi:10.1080/14681810600836471
Solberg, H., Hanstad, D., & Thøring, T. (2010). Doping in elite sport—Do the fans care? Public
opinion on the consequences of doping scandals. International Journal Of Sports
Marketing & Sponsorship, 11(3), 185-199.
Weimin, L. (2010). Framing Political Sex Scandal in Cross-Cultural Context between China and
the United States: A Comparative Case Study. China Media Research, 6(2), 67-80.
Worley, R. M. (2010). Review of 'From teacher to lover: Sex scandals in the classroom'. Criminal
Justice Studies: A Critical Journal Of Crime, Law & Society, 23(3), 277-279.
Yioutas, J., & Segvic, I. (2003). Revisiting the Clinton/Lewinsky Scandal: The Convergence of
Agenda Setting and Framing. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(3), 567582.
SPORTS SCANDALS:
Brackenridge, C. H., Bishopp, D., Moussalli, S., & Tapp, J. (2008). The characteristics of sexual
abuse in sport: A multidimensional scaling analysis of events described in media reports.
International Journal Of Sport And Exercise Psychology, 6(4), 385-406.
doi:10.1080/1612197X.2008.9671881
Brown, W. J., & de Matviuk, M. (2010). Sports Celebrities and Public Health: Diego Maradona's
Influence on Drug Use Prevention. Journal Of Health Communication, 15(4), 358-373.
doi:10.1080/10810730903460575
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 32
Bruce, T., & Tini, T. (2008). Unique crisis response strategies in sports public relations: Rugby
league and the case for diversion. Public Relations Review, 34(2), 108-115.
doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2008.03.015
Carstairs, C. (2003). The wide world of doping: Drug scandals, natural bodies, and the business
of sports entertainment. Addiction Research & Theory, 11(4), 263-281.
doi:10.1080/1606635031000135659
Connor, J. M., & Mazanov, J. (2010). The inevitability of scandal: Lessons for sponsors and
administrators. International Journal Of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 11(3), 212-220.
Domingo, B. (2003). Stop Slammin' Sammy: A Theoretical Approach to the First 24 Hours of a
Communications Crisis in Sports. Public Relations Quarterly, 48(4), 20-22.
Forbes, G. B., Jobe, R. L., White, K. B., & Richardson, R. M. (2005). Perceptions of the JacksonTimberlake Super Bowl Incident: Role of Sexism and Erotophobia. Psychological Reports,
96(3), 730-732. doi:10.2466/PR0.96.3.730-732
Grano, D. A. (2010). Risky Dispositions: Thick Moral Description and Character-Talk in Sports
Culture. Southern Communication Journal, 75(3), 255-276.
doi:10.1080/10417940903336850
Kahuni, A., Rowley, J., & Binsardi, A. (2009). Guilty by association: Image ‘spill-over’ in corporate
co-branding. Corporate Reputation Review, 12(1), 52-63. doi:10.1057/crr.2009.1
Len-Rios, M. E. (2010). Image Repair Strategies, Local News Portrayals and Crisis Stage: A Case
Study of Duke University's Lacrosse Team Crisis. International Journal Of Strategic
Communication, 4(4), 267-287. doi:10.1080/1553118X.2010.515534
Mazanov, J., & Connor, J. (2010). The role of scandal and corruption in sports marketing and
sponsorship. International Journal Of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 11(3),
Oates, T. (2009). New media and the repackaging of NFL fandom. Sociology Of Sport Journal,
26(1), 31-49.
Piquero, A. R., Piquero, N., Gertz, M., Baker, T., Batton, J., & Barnes, J. C. (2011). Race,
punishment, and the Michael Vick experience. Social Science Quarterly, 92(2), 535-551.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00781.x
Schneider, A. J. (2006). Cultural Nuances: Doping, Cycling and the Tour de France. Sport In
Society, 9(2), 212-226. doi:10.1080/17430430500491272
Sisjord, M., & Kristiansen, E. (2008). Serious athletes or media clowns? Female and male
wrestlers’ perceptions of media constructions. Sociology Of Sport Journal, 25(3), 350368.
Solberg, H., Hanstad, D., & Thøring, T. (2010). Doping in elite sport—Do the fans care? Public
opinion on the consequences of doping scandals. International Journal Of Sports
Marketing & Sponsorship, 11(3), 185-199.
Von Burg, R., & Johnson, P. E. (2009). Yearning for a Past that Never Was: Baseball, Steroids,
and the Anxiety of the American Dream. Critical Studies In Media Communication, 26(4),
351-371. doi:10.1080/15295030903176641
Walsh, J., & McAllister-Spooner, S. M. (2011). Analysis of the image repair discourse in the
Michael Phelps controversy. Public Relations Review, 37(2), 157-162.
doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.01.001
Wigley, S. (2011). Telling your own bad news: Eliot Spitzer and a test of the stealing thunder
strategy. Public Relations Review, 37(1), 50-56. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.01.003
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 33
TSUNAMIS/FLOODS:
Arquembourg, J. (2009). Who did the tsunami happen to?: An analysis of the media account of
events as part of a process in collective understanding. Global Media & Communication,
5(3), 389-408.
Borah, P. (2009). Comparing Visual Framing in Newspapers: Hurricane Katrina Versus Tsunami.
Newspaper Research Journal, 30(1), 50-57.
Gordon, J. (2007). The Mobile Phone and the Public Sphere: Mobile Phone Usage in Three
Critical Situations. Convergence: The Journal Of Research Into New Media Technologies,
13(3), 307-319. doi:10.1177/1354856507079181
Gunawardene, N. (2006). Communication rights and wrongs. Media Development, 53(3), 37-38.
Hanusch, F. (2008). Kalinga (ed.), Media's Challenge: Asian Tsunami and Beyond, Asian Media
Information and Communication Centre and Wee Kim Wee School of Communication
and Information. Media International Australia (8/1/07-Current), (129), 163-164.
Joseph, A. (2005). Gender, media and tsunamis. Media Development, 52(3), 18-22.
Kivikuru, U. (2006). Tsunami Communication in Finland. European Journal Of Communication,
21(4), 499-520.
Lutaaya, L. (2011). After The Tsunami: Crisis Communication in Finland and Sweden. Media
International Australia (8/1/07-Current), (138), 163.
Mersham, G. (2010). Social media and public information management: the September 2009
tsunami threat to New Zealand. Media International Australia (8/1/07-Current), (137),
130-143.
Motter, J. (2010). American Exceptionalism and the Rhetoric of Humanitarian Militarism: The
Case of the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami Relief Effort. Communication Studies, 61(5),
507-525. doi:10.1080/10510974.2010.514834
North, L., & Bainbridge, J. (2010). THE VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES AND EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS:
MEDIA COVERAGE, CRISIS AND COMMUNICATION. Media International Australia
(8/1/07-Current), (137), 67-70.
Perry, S. D. (2007). Tsunami warning dissemination in Mauritus. Journal Of Applied
Communication Research, 35(4), 399-417. doi:10.1080/00909880701611060
Rød, S., Botan, C., & Holen, A. (2011). Communicating risk to parents and those living in areas
with a disaster history. Public Relations Review, 37(4), 354-359.
doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.08.012
Rød, S., Botan, C., & Holen, A. (2012). Risk communication and the willingness to follow
evacuation instructions in a natural disaster. Health, Risk & Society, 14(1), 87-99.
doi:10.1080/13698575.2011.641522
Samarajiva, R. (2005). Mobilizing information and communications technologies for effective
disaster warning: Lessons from the 2004 tsunami. New Media & Society, 7(6), 731-747.
doi:10.1177/1461444805058159
Scanlon, J., McMahon, T., & van Haastert, C. (2007). Handling mass death by integrating the
management of disasters and pandemics: Lessons from the Indian Ocean Tsunami, the
Spanish flu and other incidents. Journal Of Contingencies And Crisis Management, 15(2),
80-94. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5973.2007.00511.x
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 34
Strömbäck, J., & Nord, L. W. (2006). Mismanagement, mistrust and missed opportunities: a
study of the 2004 tsunami and Swedish political communication. Media, Culture &
Society, 28(5), 789-800. doi:10.1177/0163443706067028
Sungdo, K. (2006). Semiotics of natural disaster discourse in post-tsunami world: A theoretical
framework. Sign Systems Studies, 34(1), 231-243.
Ulmer, R. R., Seeger, M. W., & Sellnow, T. L. (2007). Post-crisis communication and renewal:
Expanding the parameters of post-crisis discourse. Public Relations Review, 33(2), 130134. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.11.015
Waters, R. D., & Tindall, N. J. (2011). Exploring the impact of American news coverage on crisis
fundraising: Using media theory to explicate a new model of fundraising
communication. Journal Of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 23(1), 20-40.
doi:10.1080/10495142.2010.494875
Zhang, X. (2012). Internet Rumors and Intercultural Ethics -- A Case Study of Panic-stricken Rush
for Salt in China and Iodine Pill in America After Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami.
Studies In Literature & Language, 4(2), 13-16. doi:10.3968/j.sll.1923156320120402.2018
QUAKES:
Burke, J. A., & Jin, Z. (2010). Wenchuan Earthquake Preparation and Information Seeking:
Lessons from the Field. Northwest Journal Of Communication, (39), 109-124.
Chandana, S., & Leung, H. (2010). A System of Systems Approach to Disaster Management. IEEE
Communications Magazine, 48(3), 138-145.
Chen, N. (2009). Institutionalizing public relations: A case study of Chinese government crisis
communication on the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Public Relations Review, 35(3), 187198. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.05.010
Comfort, L. K. (1990). Turning conflict into cooperation: Organizational designs for community
response in disasters. International Journal Of Mental Health, 19(1), 89-108.
Eisenman, D. P., Glik, D., Maranon, R., Gonzales, L., & Asch, S. (2009). Developing a disaster
preparedness campaign targeting low-income Latino immigrants: Focus group results
for project PREP. Journal Of Health Care For The Poor And Underserved, 20(2), 330-345.
doi:10.1353/hpu.0.0129
Fearn-Banks, K. (1994). No Resources, No Tools, No Equipment: Crisis Communications after the
Southern California Earthquake. Public Relations Quarterly, 39(3), 23-28.
Frattaroli, L. M. (1991). The San Francisco public sector response to the Loma Prieta
earthquake. Psychiatric Annals, 21(9), 547-549.
Genova, G. L. (2006). Crisis communication practices at an international relief agency. Business
Communication Quarterly, 69(3), 329-337.
Guan, L., Xiang, H., Wu, X., Ma, N., Wu, B., Cheng, W., & ... Xiao, Z. (2011). Needs assessment
for the psychosocial support at the severely-affected counties after Wenchuan
earthquake. Chinese Mental Health Journal, 25(2), 107-112.
Inglesby, T. V. (2011). Progress in disaster planning and preparedness since 2001. JAMA: Journal
Of The American Medical Association, 306(12), 1372-1373. doi:10.1001/jama.2011.1359
Jahangiri, K., Izadkhah, Y. O., Montazeri, A., & Hosseini, M. (2010). People's perspectives and
expectations on preparedness against earthquakes: Tehran case study. Journal Of Injury
And Violence Research, 2(2), 85-91. doi:10.5249/jivr.v2i2.25
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 35
Ke, G. (2012). Perceptions of Western Media Coverage on China: Chinese Scholars vs. Foreign
Correspondents based in China. China Media Research, 8(1), 76-85.
Kodrich, K., & Laituri, M. (2005). The Formation of a Disaster Community in Cyberspace: The
Role of Online News Media after the 2001 Gujarat Earthquake. Convergence: The
Journal Of Research Into New Media Technologies, 11(3), 40-56.
Landesman, L. (2004). Does preparedness make a difference?. Family & Community Health: The
Journal Of Health Promotion & Maintenance, 27(3), 186-187.
Li, J., Li, S., Wang, W., Rao, L., & Liu, H. (2011). Are people always more risk averse after
disasters? Surveys after a heavy snow-hit and a major earthquake in China in 2008.
Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(1), 104-111. doi:10.1002/acp.1648
Major, A. (1997). Pluralistic ignorance and the climate of opinion in a real-time disaster
prediction. International Journal Of Public Opinion Research, 9(2), 170-190.
Major, A. M., & Atwood, L. (1997). Changes in media credibility when a predicted disaster
doesn't happen. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(4), 797-813.
Marmar, C. R., Weiss, D. S., Metzler, T. J., Ronfeldt, H. M., & Foreman, C. (1996). Stress
responses of emergency services personnel to the Loma Prieta earthquake interstate
880 freeway collapse and control traumatic incidents. Journal Of Traumatic Stress, 9(1),
63-85. doi:10.1002/jts.2490090107
Mulilis, J., & Duval, T. (1995). Negative threat appeals and earthquake preparedness: A personrelative-to-event (PrE) model of coping with threat. Journal Of Applied Social
Psychology, 25(15), 1319-1339. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1995.tb02620.x
Mulilis, J., & Lippa, R. (1990). Behavioral change in earthquake preparedness due to negative
threat appeals: A test of protection motivation theory. Journal Of Applied Social
Psychology, 20(8, Pt 1), 619-638. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1990.tb00429.x
Muralidharan, S., Rasmussen, L., Patterson, D., & Shin, J. (2011). Hope for Haiti: An analysis of
Facebook and Twitter usage during the earthquake relief efforts. Public Relations
Review, 37(2), 175-177. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.01.010
Noam, E. M., & Sato., H. (1995). Kobe's Lesson: Dial 711 for 'Open' Emergency Communications.
Telecommunications Policy, 19(8), 595-598.
Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Morrow, J. (1991). A prospective study of depression and posttraumatic
stress symptoms after a natural disaster: The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Journal Of
Personality And Social Psychology, 61(1), 115-121. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.1.115
Padovani, C. (2010). Citizens' Communication and the 2009 G8 Summit in L'Aquila, Italy.
International Journal Of Communication (19328036), 4416-439.
Pennebaker, J. W., & Harber, K. D. (1993). A social stage model of collective coping: The Loma
Prieta earthquake and the Persian Gulf War. Journal Of Social Issues, 49(4), 125-145.
Priya, K. (2010). The research relationship as a facilitator of remoralization and self-growth:
Postearthquake suffering and healing. Qualitative Health Research, 20(4), 479-495.
doi:10.1177/1049732309360419
Samarajiva, R. (2005). Mobilizing information and communications technologies for effective
disaster warning: Lessons from the 2004 tsunami. New Media & Society, 7(6), 731-747.
doi:10.1177/1461444805058159
Showalter, P. (1995). One newspaper's coverage of 1990 earthquake prediction. Newspaper
Research Journal, 16(2), 2-13.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 36
Smith, B. G. (2010). Socially distributing public relations: Twitter, Haiti, and interactivity in social
media. Public Relations Review, 36(4), 329-335. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.08.005
Thelwall, M., & Stuart, D. (2007). RUOK? Blogging Communication Technologies During Crises.
Journal Of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 523-548. doi:10.1111/j.10836101.2007.00336.x
Walters, L., & Hornig, S. (1993). Faces in the news: Network television news coverage of
Hurricane Hugo and the Loma Prieta.. Journal Of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 37(2),
219.
Yang, A. (2009). Chinese Media in Change: A Comparison of Chinese Media Framing of the 2003
SARS Crisis and the 2008 Sichuan Earthquake. Conference Papers -- International
Communication Association, 1-41.
Yang, A., & Klyueva, A. (2009). Natural Disaster as a Catalyst for Building Civil Society: A Case
Study of the Sichuan Earthquake in China. Conference Papers -- National Communication
Association, 1.
Yang, R. (2011). Considerations and suggestions on improvement of communication network
disaster countermeasures after the wenchuan earthquake. IEEE Communications
Magazine, 49(1), 44-47. doi:10.1109/MCOM.2011.5681013
Yates, D., & Paquette, S. (2011). Emergency knowledge management and social media
technologies: A case study of the 2010 Haitian Earthquake. International Journal Of
Information Management, 31(1), 6-13. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.10.001
Yin, H., He, H., Arbon, P., & Zhu, J. (2011). A survey of the practice of nurses' skills in Wenchuan
earthquake disaster sites: Implications for disaster training. Journal Of Advanced
Nursing, 67(10), 2231-2238. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05699.x
Zhu, D., Xie, X., & Gan, Y. (2011). Information source and valence: How information credibility
influences earthquake risk perception. Journal Of Environmental Psychology, 31(2), 129136. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.09.005
Haiti:
Asante, M. (2011). Haiti: Three analytical narratives of crisis and recovery. Journal Of Black
Studies, 42(2), 276-287. doi:10.1177/0021934710395589
Bauduy, J. (2010). Mapping a Crisis, One Text Message at a Time. Social Education, 74(3), 142143.
Bellegarde-Smith, P. (2011). A man-made disaster: The earthquake of January 12, 2010—A
Haitian perspective. Journal Of Black Studies, 42(2), 264-275.
doi:10.1177/0021934710396709
Davidson, S. (2010). Psychosocial support within a global movement. The Psychologist, 23(4),
304-307.
Fair, D. J. (2010). Lessons learned from Haiti. Annals Of The American Psychotherapy Assn,
13(1), 72-73.
Hale, S. A. (2012). Net Increase? Cross-Lingual Linking in the Blogosphere. Journal Of ComputerMediated Communication, 17(2), 135-151. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01568.x
Jacobs, S. C., Leach, M. M., & Gerstein, L. H. (2011). Introduction and overview: Counseling
psychologists’ roles, training, and research contributions to large-scale disasters. The
Counseling Psychologist, 39(8), 1070-1086. doi:10.1177/0011000010392245
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 37
Jeong, S. (2010). Public support for Haitian earthquake victims: Role of attributions and
emotions. Public Relations Review, 36(4), 325-328. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.08.003
Landry, M. D., O'Connell, C., Tardif, G., & Burns, A. (2010). Post-earthquake Haiti: The critical
role for rehabilitation services following a humanitarian crisis. Disability And
Rehabilitation: An International, Multidisciplinary Journal, 32(19), 1616-1618.
doi:10.3109/09638288.2010.500345
Muralidharan, S., Rasmussen, L., Patterson, D., & Shin, J. (2011). Hope for Haiti: An analysis of
Facebook and Twitter usage during the earthquake relief efforts. Public Relations
Review, 37(2), 175-177. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.01.010
Smith, B. G. (2010). Socially distributing public relations: Twitter, Haiti, and interactivity in social
media. Public Relations Review, 36(4), 329-335. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.08.005
van der Velden, P. G., van Loon, P., Benight, C. C., & Eckhardt, T. (2012). Mental health
problems among search and rescue workers deployed in the Haïti earthquake 2010: A
pre–post comparison. Psychiatry Research, doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2012.02.017
Yates, D., & Paquette, S. (2011). Emergency knowledge management and social media
technologies: A case study of the 2010 Haitian Earthquake. International Journal Of
Information Management, 31(1), 6-13. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.10.001
Piotrowski, C. (2010). Earthquake in Haiti: The failure of crisis management?. Organization
Development Journal, 28(1), 107-112.
See also:
 http://www.alnap.org/pool/files/haiti-context-analysis-final.pdf
 http://www.alnap.org/pool/files/haiti-mapping-february-2011.pdf
CLIMATE CHANGE VS. GLOBAL WARMING:
Antilla, L. (2010). Self-censorship and science: a geographical review of media coverage of
climate tipping points. Public Understanding Of Science, 19(2), 240-256.
doi:10.1177/0963662508094099
Antonio, R. J., & Brulle, R. J. (2011). The unbearable lightness of politics: Climate change denial
and political polarization. The Sociological Quarterly, 52(2), 195-202.
doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01199.x
Asim, Z., & Todd, A. (2010). Evaluating the effects of ideology on public understanding of
climate change science: How to improve communication across ideological divides?.
Public Understanding Of Science, 19(6), 743-761. doi:10.1177/0963662509357871
Beattie, G., Sale, L., & Mcguire, L. (2011). An inconvenient truth? Can a film really affect
psychological mood and our explicit attitudes towards climate change?. Semiotica,
187(1-4), 105-125. doi:10.1515/semi.2011.066
Borick, C. P., & Rabe, B. G. (2010). A reason to believe: Examining the factors that determine
individual views on global warming. Social Science Quarterly, 91(3), 777-800.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00719.x
Brossard, D., Shanahan, J., & McComas, K. (2004). Are Issue-Cycles Culturally Constructed? A
Comparison of French and American Coverage of Global Climate Change. Mass
Communication & Society, 7(3), 359-377.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 38
Brulle, R. J. (2010). From Environmental Campaigns to Advancing the Public Dialog:
Environmental Communication for Civic Engagement. Environmental Communication,
4(1), 82-98. doi:10.1080/17524030903522397
Ceccarelli, l. (2011). Manufactured scientific controversy: science, rhetoric, and public debate.
Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 14(2), 195-228.
Christen, C. T., & Huberty, K. E. (2007). Media reach, media influence? The effects of local,
national, and internet news on public opinion inferences. Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly, 84(2), 315-334.
Corbett, J. B., & Durfee, J. L. (2004). Testing Public (Un)Certainty of Science. Science
Communication, 26(2), 129-151. doi:10.1177/1075547004270234
Culley, M. R., & Angelique, H. (2010). Nuclear power: Renaissance or relapse? Global climate
change and long-term three mile island activists’ narratives. American Journal Of
Community Psychology, 45(3-4), 231-246. doi:10.1007/s10464-010-9299-8
Dirikx, A., & Gelders, D. (2010). Ideologies Overruled? An Explorative Study of the Link Between
Ideology and Climate Change Reporting in Dutch and French Newspapers.
Environmental Communication, 4(2), 190-205. doi:10.1080/17524031003760838
Fahn, J. (2009). Rescuing climate reporting in the South. Media Development, 56(2), 21-24.
Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2011). Apocalypse soon? Dire messages reduce belief in global
warming by contradicting just-world beliefs. Psychological Science, 22(1), 34-38.
doi:10.1177/0956797610391911
Feldman, L., Maibach, E. W., Roser-Renouf, C., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). Climate on Cable: The
Nature and Impact of Global Warming Coverage on Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC.
International Journal Of Press/Politics, 17(1), 3-31. doi:10.1177/1940161211425410
Feresin, E. (2009). The challenges of communicating climate change. JCOM: Journal Of Science
Communication, 8(2), 1-2.
Feygina, I., Jost, J. T., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2010). System justification, the denial of global
warming, and the possibility of “system-sanctioned change”. Personality And Social
Psychology Bulletin, 36(3), 326-338. doi:10.1177/0146167209351435
Foust, C. R., & Murphy, W. (2009). Revealing and Reframing Apocalyptic Tragedy in Global
Warming Discourse. Environmental Communication, 3(2), 151-167.
doi:10.1080/17524030902916624
Fritsche, I., Cohrs, J., Kessler, T., & Bauer, J. (2012). Global warming is breeding social conflict:
The subtle impact of climate change threat on authoritarian tendencies. Journal Of
Environmental Psychology, 32(1), 1-10. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.10.002
Good, J. E. (2008). The Framing of Climate Change in Canadian, American, and International
Newspapers: A Media Propaganda Model Analysis. (2008). Canadian Journal of
Communication, 33(2), 233-255.
Greenberg, J., Knight, G., & Westersund, E. (2011). Spinning climate change: Corporate and
NGO public relations strategies in Canada and the United States. International
Communication Gazette, 73(1/2), 65-82. doi:10.1177/1748048510386742
Hart, P., & Leiserowitz, A. A. (2009). Finding the Teachable Moment: An Analysis of InformationSeeking Behavior on Global Warming Related Websites during the Release of The Day
After Tomorrow. Environmental Communication, 3(3), 355-366.
doi:10.1080/17524030903265823
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 39
Henning, A. (2008). The illusion of economic objectivity: Linking local risks of credibility loss to
global risks of climate change. Journal Of Risk Research, 11(1-2), 223-235.
doi:10.1080/13669870801939498
Kahlor, L., & Rosenthal, S. (2009). If We Seek, Do We Learn? Predicting Knowledge of Global
Warming. Science Communication, 30(3), 380-414.
Kellstedt, P. M., Zahran, S., & Vedlitz, A. (2008). Personal efficacy, the information environment,
and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk
Analysis, 28(1), 113-126. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01010.x
Kim, K. (2011). Public understanding of the politics of global warming in the news media: the
hostile media approach. Public Understanding Of Science, 20(5), 690-705.
doi:10.1177/0963662510372313
Lakoff, G. (2010). Why it Matters How We Frame the Environment. Environmental
Communication, 4(1), 70-81. doi:10.1080/17524030903529749
Leiserowitz, A. A. (2005). American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous?. Risk
Analysis, 25(6), 1433-1442. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00690.x
Lewandowsky, S. (2011). Popular consensus: Climate change is set to continue. Psychological
Science, 22(4), 460-463. doi:10.1177/0956797611402515
Lorenzoni, I., Leiserowitz, A., De Franca Doria, M., Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2006). CrossNational Comparisons of Image Associations with 'Global Warming' and 'Climate
Change' Among Laypeople in the United States of America and Great Britain. Journal Of
Risk Research, 9(3), 265-281. doi:10.1080/13669870600613658
Lubell, M., Zahran, S., & Vedlitz, A. (2007). Collective action and citizen responses to global
warming. Political Behavior, 29(3), 391-413. doi:10.1007/s11109-006-9025-2
Mazur, A. (1998). Global Environmental Change in the News: 1987-90 vs 1992-6. International
Sociology, 13(4), 457-472.
McComas, K., & Shanahan, J. (1999). Telling stories about global climate change: Measuring the
impact of narratives on issue cycles. Communication Research, 26(1), 30-57.
doi:10.1177/009365099026001003
McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2011). The politicization of climate change and polarization in
the American public's views of global warming, 2001–2010. The Sociological Quarterly,
52(2), 155-194. doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.x
Mead, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Rimal, R. N., Flora, J. A., Maibach, E. W., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012).
Information Seeking About Global Climate Change Among Adolescents: The Role of Risk
Perceptions, Efficacy Beliefs, and Parental Influences. Atlantic Journal Of
Communication, 20(1), 31-52. doi:10.1080/15456870.2012.637027
Mellor, F. (2009). The Politics of Accuracy in Judging Global Warming Films. Environmental
Communication, 3(2), 134-150. doi:10.1080/17524030902916574
Moore, M. P. (2009). The Union of Concerned Scientists on the Uncertainty of Climate Change:
A Study of Synecdochic Form. Environmental Communication, 3(2), 191-205.
doi:10.1080/17524030902916657
Nerlich, B., Forsyth, R., & Clarke, D. (2012). Climate in the News: How Differences in Media
Discourse Between the US and UK Reflect National Priorities. Environmental
Communication, 6(1), 44-63. doi:10.1080/17524032.2011.644633
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 40
Nerlich, B., Koteyko, N., & Brown, B. (2010) Theory and language of climate change
communication. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1 (1). pp. 97-110.
Olausson, U. (2009). Global warming—global responsibility? Media frames of collective action
and scientific certainty. Public Understanding Of Science, 18(4), 421-436.
doi:10.1177/0963662507081242
Rehg, W. (2011). Evaluating Complex Collaborative Expertise: The Case of Climate Change.
Argumentation, 25(3), 385-400. doi:10.1007/s10503-011-9223-x
Reynolds, T., Bostrom, A., Read, D., & Morgan, M. (2010). Now what do people know about
global climate change? Survey studies of educated laypeople. Risk Analysis, 30(10),
1520-1538. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01448.x
Schuldt, J. P., Konrath, S. H., & Schwarz, N. (2011). ‘‘Global warming’’ or ‘‘climate change’’?
Whether the planet is warming depends on question wording. Public Opinion Quarterly,
75(1), 115-124. doi:10.1093/poq/nfq073
Shehata, A., & Hopmann, D. (2012). FRAMING CLIMATE CHANGE. Journalism Studies, 13(2),
175-192. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2011.646396
Shepardson, D. P., Niyogi, D., Choi, S., & Charusombat, U. (2009). Seventh grade students'
conceptions of global warming and climate change. Environmental Education Research,
15(5), 549-570. doi:10.1080/13504620903114592
Sundblad, E., Biel, A., & Gärling, T. (2009). Knowledge and confidence in knowledge about
climate change among experts, journalists, politicians, and laypersons. Environment And
Behavior, 41(2), 281-302. doi:10.1177/0013916508314998
Taber, F., & Taylor, N. (2009). Climate of concern — A search for effective strategies for
teaching children about global warming. International Journal Of Environmental And
Science Education, 4(2), 97-116.
Thompson, L. G. (2010). Climate change: The evidence of our opinions. The Behavior Analyst,
33(2), 153-170.
Tutt, B. (2009). Frames in Reports and in Reporting: How Framing Affects Global Warming
Information in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's "Summary for
Policymakers" and in Documents Written about the Report. Journal Of Technical Writing
& Communication, 39(1), 43-55. doi:10.2190/TW.39.1.d
Villagran, M., Weathers, M., Keefe, B., & Sparks, L. (2010). Medical providers as global warming
and climate change health educators: A health literacy approach. Communication
Education, 59(3), 312-327. doi:10.1080/03634521003624049
Weber, E. U., & Stern, P. C. (2011). Public understanding of climate change in the United States.
American Psychologist, 66(4), 315-328. doi:10.1037/a0023253
Whitmarsh, L. (2009). What's in a name? Commonalities and differences in public
understanding of "climate change" and "global warming". Public Understanding Of
Science, 18(4), 401-420. doi:10.1177/0963662506073088
Yeager, D., Larson, S. B., Krosnick, J. A., & Tompson, T. (2011). Measuring Americans’ issue
priorities: A new version of the Most Important Problem question reveals more concern
about global warming and the environment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(1), 125-138.
doi:10.1093/poq/nfq075
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 41
Young, N., & Dugas, E. (2011). Representations of climate change in Canadian national print
media: The banalization of global warming. Canadian Review Of Sociology, 48(1), 1-22.
doi:10.1111/j.1755-618X.2011.01247.x
Zhao, X., Leiserowitz, A. A., Maibach, E. W., & Roser‐Renouf, C. (2011). Attention to
science/environment news positively predicts and attention to political news negatively
predicts global warming risk perceptions and policy support. Journal Of Communication,
61(4), 713-731. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01563.x
9/11:
American Airlines' use of mediated employee channels after the 9/11 attacks. (2004). Public
Relations Review, 30(1), 37-48. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2003.11.004
Brown, C., & Waltzer, H. (2004). Organized Interest Advertorials: Responding to the 9/11
Terrorist Attack and Other National Traumas. Harvard International Journal Of
Press/Politics, 9(4), 25-48. doi:10.1 177/1081180X04271102
DeRoma, V., Saylor, C., Swickert, R., Sinisi, C., Marable, T., & Vickery, P. (2003). College
Students' PTSD Symptoms, Coping, and Perceived Benefits Following Media Exposure to
9/11. Journal Of College Student Psychotherapy, 18(1), 49-64.
doi:10.1300/J035v18n01_05
Dutta-Bergman, M. J. (2006). Community Participation and Internet Use after September 11:
Complementarity in Channel Consumption. Journal Of Computer-Mediated
Communication, 11(2), 469-484. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00022.x
Honos-Webb, L., Sunwolf, Hart, S., & Scalise, J. T. (2006). How To Help After National
Catastrophes: Findings Following 9/11. The Humanistic Psychologist, 34(1), 75-97.
doi:10.1207/s15473333thp3401_7
Kim, Y., Jung, J., Cohen, E. L., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (2004). Internet connectedness before and
after September 11 2001. New Media & Society, 6(5), 611-631.
doi:10.1177/146144804047083
Nafría, J. (2011). The Need for an Informational Systems Approach to Security. Triplec
(Cognition, Communication, Co-Operation): Open Access Journal For A Global
Sustainable Information Society, 9(1), 93-122.
Nagar, N. (2010). Who is afraid of the T-word? Labeling terror in the media coverage of political
violence before and after 9/11. Terrorism, 33(6), 533-547.
doi:10.1080/10576101003752655
Polletta, F., & Lee, J. (2006). Is Telling Stories Good for Democracy? Rhetoric in Public
Deliberation after 9/11. American Sociological Review, 71(5), 699-723.
Reboul, A. (2006). Intercultural pragmatics and the clash of civilizations: Western and Muslim
interactions before and since 9/11. Intercultural Pragmatics, 3(4), 465-485.
doi:10.1515/IP.2006.028
HOSTAGE NEGOTIATIONS & COMMUNICATION:
Bahn, C., & Louden, R. J. (1999). Hostage negotiation as a team enterprise. Group, 23(2), 77-85.
doi:10.1023/A:1023084206051
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 42
Charlés, L. L. (2007). Disarming people with words: strategies of interactional communication
that crisis (hostage) negotiators share with systemic clinicians. Journal Of Marital And
Family Therapy, 33(1), 51-68. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2007.00045_1.x
Dolnik, A., & Fitzgerald, K. M. (2011). Negotiating hostage crises with the new terrorists. Studies
In Conflict & Terrorism, 34(4), 267-294. doi:10.1080/1057610X.2011.551718
Donohue, W. A., & Roberto, A. J. (1993). Relational development as negotiated order in hostage
negotiation. Human Communication Research, 20(2), 175-198. doi:10.1111/j.14682958.1993.tb00320.x
Donohue, W. A., & Roberto, A. J. (1996). An empirical examination of three models of
integrative and distributive bargaining. International Journal Of Conflict Management,
7(3), 209-229. doi:10.1108/eb022782
Donohue, W. A., Ramesh, C., & Borchgrevink, C. (1991). Crisis bargaining: Tracking relational
paradox in hostage negotiation. International Journal Of Conflict Management, 2(4),
257-274. doi:10.1108/eb022701
GAIBULLOEV, K., & SANDLER, T. (2009). Hostage Taking: Determinants of Terrorist Logistical and
Negotiation Success. Journal Of Peace Research, 46(6), 739-756.
Giebels, E., Noelanders, S., & Vervaeke, G. (2005). The Hostage Experience: Implications for
Negotiation Strategies. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 12(3), 241-253.
doi:10.1002/cpp.453
Giebels, E., & Taylor, P. J. (2009). Interaction patterns in crisis negotiations: Persuasive
arguments and cultural differences. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 5-19.
doi:10.1037/a0012953
Grubb, A. (2010). Modern day hostage (crisis) negotiation: The evolution of an art form within
the policing arena. Aggression And Violent Behavior, doi:10.1016/j.avb.2010.06.002
Holmes, M. E. (1997). Optimal Matching Analysis of Negotiation Phase Sequences in Simulated
and Authentic Hostage Negotiations. Communication Reports, 10(1), 1-8.
Hughes, J. (2009). A pilot study of naturally occurring high-probability request sequences in
hostage negotiations. Journal Of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42(2), 491-496.
doi:10.1901/jaba.2009.42-491
Miller, L. (2005). Hostage negotiation: Psychological principles and practices. International
Journal Of Emergency Mental Health, 7(4), 277-298.
Taylor, P. J. (2002). A cylindrical model of communication behavior in crisis negotiations.
Human Communication Research, 28(1), 7-48. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00797.x
Taylor, P. J., & Thomas, S. (2008). Linguistic style matching and negotiation outcome.
Negotiation And Conflict Management Research, 1(3), 263-281. doi:10.1111/j.17504716.2008.00016.x
Van Hasselt, V. B., Baker, M. T., Romano, S. J., Sellers, A. H., Noesner, G. W., & Smith, S. (2005).
Development and Validation of a Role-Play Test for Assessing Crisis (Hostage)
Negotiation Skills. Criminal Justice And Behavior, 32(3), 345-361.
doi:10.1177/0093854804274374
Van Hasselt, V., Baker, M. T., Romano, S. J., Schlessinger, K. M., Zucker, M., Dragone, R., &
Perera, A. L. (2006). Crisis (Hostage) Negotiation Training: A Preliminary Evaluation of
Program Efficacy. Criminal Justice And Behavior, 33(1), 56-69.
doi:10.1177/0093854805282328
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 43
Vecchi, G. M., Van Hasselt, V. B., & Romano, S. J. (2005). Crisis (hostage) negotiation: Current
strategies and issues in high-risk conflict resolution. Aggression And Violent Behavior,
10(5), 533-551. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2004.10.001
GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS:
Devcich, D. A., Pedersen, I. K., & Petrie, K. J. (2007). You eat what you are: Modern health
worries and the acceptance of natural and synthetic additives in functional foods.
Appetite, 48(3), 333-337. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2006.09.014
Dreezens, E., Martijn, C., Tenbült, P., Kok, G., & de Vries, N. K. (2005). Food and values: An
examination of values underlying attitudes toward genetically modified- and organically
grown food products. Appetite, 44(1), 115-122. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2004.07.003
Eden, S. (2011). Food labels as boundary objects: How consumers make sense of organic and
functional foods. Public Understanding Of Science, 20(2), 179-194.
doi:10.1177/0963662509336714
Finucane, M. L., & Holup, J. L. (2005). Psychosocial and cultural factors affecting the perceived
risk of genetically modified food: An overview of the literature. Social Science &
Medicine, 60(7), 1603-1612. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.08.007
Grunert, K. G., Fernández-Celemín, L., Wills, J. M., Bonsmann, S., & Nureeva, L. (2010). Use and
understanding of nutrition information on food labels in six European countries. Journal
Of Public Health, 18(3), 261-277. doi:10.1007/s10389-009-0307-0
Haukenes, A. (2004). Perceived health risks and perceptions of expert consensus in modern
food society. Journal Of Risk Research, 7(7-8), 759-774.
doi:10.1080/13669870210166194
Hjelmar, U. (2011). Consumers' purchase of organic food products. A matter of convenience
and reflexive practices. Appetite, 56(2), 336-344. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2010.12.019
Horlick-Jones, T., Walls, J., & Kitzinger, J. (2007). Bricolage in action: Learning about, making
sense of, and discussing, issues about genetically modified crops and food. Health, Risk
& Society, 9(1), 83-103. doi:10.1080/13698570601181623
Jasti, S., & Kovacs, S. (2010). Use of trans fat information on food labels and its determinants in
a multiethnic college student population. Journal Of Nutrition Education And Behavior,
42(5), 307-314. doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2009.06.004
Jay, M., Adams, J., Herring, S. J., Gillespie, C., Ark, T., Feldman, H., & ... Kalet, A. (2009). A
randomized trial of a brief multimedia intervention to improve comprehension of food
labels. Preventive Medicine: An International Journal Devoted To Practice And Theory,
48(1), 25-31. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.10.011
Keebaugh, K. C., Escoffery, C., Lu, C., & Marcus, M. (2010). Demographic predictors of organic
food purchase among university students. International Journal Of Child Health And
Human Development, 3(4), 437-453.
Kempen, E., Bosman, M., Bouwer, C., Klein, R., & van der Merwe, D. (2011). An exploration of
the influence of food labels on South African consumers' purchasing behaviour.
International Journal Of Consumer Studies, 35(1), 69-78. doi:10.1111/j.14706431.2010.00928.x
Klerck, D., & Sweeney, J. C. (2007). The effect of knowledge types on consumer-perceived risk
and adoption of genetically modified foods. Psychology & Marketing, 24(2), 171-193.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 44
Koivisto Hursti, U. K., & Magnusson, M. K. (2003). Consumer perceptions of genetically modified
and organic foods. What kind of knowledge matters?. Appetite, 41(2), 207-209.
doi:10.1016/S0195-6663(03)00056-4
Kreuter, M. W., Brennan, L. K., Scharff, D. P., & Lukwago, S. N. (1997). Do nutrition label readers
eat healthier diets? Behavioral correlates of adults' use of food labels. American Journal
Of Preventive Medicine, 13(4), 277-283.
Kriwy, P., & Mecking, R. (2012). Health and environmental consciousness, costs of behaviour
and the purchase of organic food. International Journal Of Consumer Studies, 36(1), 3037. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01004.x
Lando, A. M., & Labiner-Wolfe, J. (2007). Helping consumers make more healthful food choices:
Consumer views on modifying food labels and providing point-of-purchase nutrition
information at quick-service restaurants. Journal Of Nutrition Education And Behavior,
39(3), 157-163. doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2006.12.010
Lin, C., Lee, J., & Yen, S. T. (2004). Do dietary intakes affect search for nutrient information on
food labels?. Social Science & Medicine, 59(9), 1955-1967.
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.02.030
Magnusson, M. K., & Hursti, U. (2002). Consumer attitudes towards genetically modified foods.
Appetite, 39(1), 9-24. doi:10.1006/appe.2002.0486
Magnusson, M. K., Arvola, A., Koivisto Hursti, U., Åberg, L., & Sjödén, P. (2003). Choice of
organic foods is related to perceived consequences for human health and to
environmentally friendly behaviour. Appetite, 40(2), 109-117. doi:10.1016/S01956663(03)00002-3
McInerney, C., Bird, N., & Nucci, M. (2004). The Flow of Scientific Knowledge from Lab to the
Lay Public. Science Communication, 26(1), 44-74. doi:10.1177/10755447004267024
Michaelidou, N., & Hassan, L. M. (2008). The role of health consciousness, food safety concern
and ethical identity on attitudes and intentions towards organic food. International
Journal Of Consumer Studies, 32(2), 163-170. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2007.00619.x
Miles, S., Hafner, C., Bolhaar, S., Mancebo, E., Fernández-Rivas, M., Knulst, A., & HoffmannSommergruber, K. (2006). Attitudes Towards Genetically Modified Food with a Specific
Consumer Benefit in Food Allergic Consumers and Non-food Allergic Consumers. Journal
Of Risk Research, 9(7), 801-813. doi:10.1080/13669870600958061
Nelson, C. H. (2001). Risk perception, behavior, and consumer response to genetically modified
organisms: Toward understanding American and European public reaction. American
Behavioral Scientist, 44(8), 1371-1388. doi:10.1177/00027640121956737
Obayashi, S., Bianchi, L. J., & Song, W. (2003). Reliability and validity of nutrition knowledge,
social-psychological factors, and food label use scales from the 1995 Diet and Health
Knowledge Survey. Journal Of Nutrition Education And Behavior, 35(2), 83-92.
doi:10.1016/S1499-4046(06)60044-4
Quah, S., & Tan, A. G. (2010). Consumer purchase decisions of organic food products: An ethnic
analysis. Journal Of International Consumer Marketing, 22(1), 47-58.
doi:10.1080/08961530902844949
Rayner, M., Boaz, A., & Higginson, C. (2001). Consumer use of health-related endorsements on
food labels in the United Kingdom and Australia. Journal Of Nutrition Education, 33(1),
24-30. doi:10.1016/S1499-4046(06)60006-7
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 45
Rothman, R. L., Housam, R., Weiss, H., Davis, D., Gregory, R., Gebretsadik, T., & ... Elasy, T. A.
(2006). Patient Understanding of Food Labels: The Role of Literacy and Numeracy.
American Journal Of Preventive Medicine, 31(5), 391-398.
doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2006.07.025
Saher, M., Lindeman, M., & Hursti, U. (2006). Attitudes towards genetically modified and
organic foods. Appetite, 46(3), 324-331. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2006.01.015
Sharf, M., Sela, R., Zentner, G., Shoob, H., Shai, I., & Stein-Zamir, C. (2012). Figuring out food
labels. Young adults' understanding of nutritional information presented on food labels
is inadequate. Appetite, 58(2), 531-534. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2011.12.010
Silk, K. J., Parrot, R. L., & Dillow, M. R. (2003). USING THEORY TO GUIDE FORMATIVE
EVALUATION OF 'WHO'S AFRAID OF FRANKEN-FOOD?': IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH
MESSAGE DESIGN (IN PRESS, COMMUNICATION STUDIES). Communication Studies,
54(1), 1.
Smith, S., & Paladino, A. (2010). Eating clean and green? Investigating consumer motivations
towards the purchase of organic food. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 18(2), 93104. doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2010.01.001
Tenbült, P., de Vries, N. K., Dreezens, E., & Martijn, C. (2005). Perceived naturalness and
acceptance of genetically modified food. Appetite, 45(1), 47-50.
doi:10.1016/j.appet.2005.03.004
Tenbült, P., De Vries, N. K., van Breukelen, G., Dreezens, E., & Martijn, C. (2008). Acceptance of
genetically modified foods: The relation between technology and evaluation. Appetite,
51(1), 129-136. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2008.01.004
Vilella-Vila, M., & Costa-Font, J. (2008). Press media reporting effects on risk perceptions and
attitudes towards Genetically Modified (GM) food. The Journal Of Socio-Economics,
37(5), 2095-2106. doi:10.1016/j.socec.2008.04.006
Williams, P. D., & Hammitt, J. K. (2001). Perceived risks of conventional and organic produce:
Pesticides, pathogens, and natural toxins. Risk Analysis, 21(2), 319-330.
doi:10.1111/0272-4332.212114
Wilson, C., Evans, G., Leppard, P., & Syrette, J. (2004). Reactions to Genetically Modified Food
Crops and How Perception of Risks and Benefits Influences Consumers' Information
Gathering. Risk Analysis, 24(5), 1311-1321. doi:10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00528.x
Yin, H., Johnson, M., Mendelsohn, A. L., Abrams, M., Sanders, L. M., & Dreyer, B. P. (2009). The
health literacy of parents in the United States: A nationally representative study.
Pediatrics, 124(5, Suppl 3), S289-S298. doi:10.1542/peds.2009-1162E
See also:
 http://www.foodriskcommunications.org/risk-communications-for-professionals/riskcommunication.aspx
WILDFIRES, EVACUATION:
Anderson, W. A. (1969). Disaster warning and communication processes in two communities.
Journal Of Communication, 19(2), 92-104. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1969.tb00834.x
Avery, E. (2010). The role of source and the factors audiences rely on in evaluating credibility of
health information. Public Relations Review, 36(1), 81-83.
doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.10.015
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 46
Bates, B. R., Quick, B. L., & Kloss, A. A. (2009). Antecedents of intention to help mitigate
wildfire: Implications for campaigns promoting wildfire mitigation to the general public
in the wildland–urban interface. Safety Science, 47(3), 374-381.
doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2008.06.002
Cheek, J. (2005). REWORKING THE EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM TO MEET THE NEEDS OF
HOMELAND SECURITY: OVERCOMING OBSTACLES TO ESTABLISH AN EFFECTIVE PUBLIC
WARNING SYSTEM. Commlaw Conspectus, 13(2), 435-470.
Farmer, B., & Tvedt, L. (2005). Top Management Communication During Crises: Guidelines and
a 'Perfect Example' of a Crisis Leader. Public Relations Quarterly, 50(2), 27-31.
Klimoski, R. (2005). Making Decisions as if Lives Depend on Them. Academy Of Management
Learning & Education, 4(4), 459-460.
Martin, I. M., Bender, H., & Raish, C. (2007). What motivates individuals to protect themselves
from risks: The case of wildland fires. Risk Analysis, 27(4), 887-900. doi:10.1111/j.15396924.2007.00930.x
McLennan, J., Holgate, A. M., Omodei, M. M., & Wearing, A. J. (2006). Decision making
effectiveness in wildfire incident management teams. Journal Of Contingencies And
Crisis Management, 14(1), 27-37. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5973.2006.00478.x
Mileti, D. S., & Beck, E. M. (1975). Communication in crisis: Explaining evacuation symbolically.
Communication Research, 2(1), 24-49. doi:10.1177/009365027500200102
Mutter, J. C. (2008). Preconditions of Disaster: Premonitions of Tragedy. Social Research, 75(3),
691-724.
Netten, N., & van Someren, M. (2011). Improving communication in crisis management by
evaluating the relevance of messages. Journal Of Contingencies And Crisis Management,
19(2), 75-85. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5973.2011.00636.x
Palser, B. (2009). Hitting the Tweet Spot. American Journalism Review, 31(2), 54.
Paveglio, T., Carroll, M. S., Absher, J. D., & Norton, T. (2009). Just Blowing Smoke? Residents'
Social Construction of Communication about Wildfire. Environmental Communication,
3(1), 76-94. doi:10.1080/17524030802704971
Rowan, F. (2002). Public participation and risk communication. International Journal Of
Emergency Mental Health, 4(4), 253-258.
Santos, R. S., Borges, M. S., Canós, J. H., & Gomes, J. (2011). The assessment of information
technology maturity in emergency response organizations. Group Decision And
Negotiation, 20(5), 593-613. doi:10.1007/s10726-011-9232-z
Scher, C. D., & Ellwanger, J. (2009). Fire-related cognitions moderate the impact of risk factors
on adjustment following wildfire disaster. Journal Of Anxiety Disorders, 23(7), 891-896.
doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2009.05.007
Spence, P. R., Lachlan, K., Burke, J. M., & Seeger, M. W. (2007). Media use and information
needs of the disabled during a natural disaster. Journal Of Health Care For The Poor And
Underserved, 18(2), 394-404. doi:10.1353/hpu.2007.0047
Tanaka, K., & Kato, T. (2011). Perceived danger can be influenced by how the emergency
information is expressed. The Japanese Journal Of Cognitive Psychology, 9(1), 1-7.
doi:10.5265/jcogpsy.9.1
Tedim, F. (2008). Fire risk communication and preparedness: New evidence to empower the
communities. Australasian Journal Of Disaster And Trauma Studies, 2008(2), 1-3.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 47
Venette, S. (2008). Risk as an Inherent Element in the Study of Crisis Communication. Southern
Communication Journal, 73(3), 197-210. doi:10.1080/10417940802219686
Wilson, R. S., Winter, P. L., Maguire, L. A., & Ascher, T. (2011). Managing wildfire events:
Risk‐based decision making among a group of federal fire managers. Risk Analysis, 31(5),
805-818. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01534.x
Ziegler, J. A. (2007). The Story Behind an Organizational List: A Genealogy of Wildland
Firefighters' 10 Standard Fire Orders. Communication Monographs, 74(4), 415-442.
doi:10.1080/03637750701716594
See also:
 http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_protection/downloads/siege/2007/Overview_CompleteFin
al.pdf
 http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5297020.pdf
MINING ACCIDENTS:
Charlebois, S., & Elliott, G. (2009). Mining for mindsets: The conceptual anatomy of a successful
crisis communication strategy in mining. Journal Of Marketing Communications, 15(1),
55-71. doi:10.1080/13527260802630431
Chen, H., Qi, H., Long, R., & Zhang, M. (2012). Research on 10-year tendency of China coal mine
accidents and the characteristics of human factors. Safety Science, 50(4), 745-750.
doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2011.08.040
Coleman, P. J., & Kerkering, J. C. (2007). Measuring mining safety with injury statistics: Lost
workdays as indicators of risk. Journal Of Safety Research, 38(5), 523-533.
Gallagher, S., Moore, S., & Dempsey, P. G. (2009). An analysis of injury claims from low-seam
coal mines. Journal Of Safety Research, 40(3), 233-237. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2009.04.003
Goodman, P. S., & Garber, S. (1988). Absenteeism and accidents in a dangerous environment:
Empirical analysis of underground coal mines. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 73(1), 8186. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.73.1.81
Hoffmann, G. (2006). MINING TRAGEDY RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT INSTANT INFO. ETC: A
Review Of General Semantics, 63(2), 217-219.
Kecojevic, V. (2011). Analysis of “high-dollar” value safety and health citations and orders for
the US coal mines. Safety Science, 49(5), 658-663. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2010.12.001
Kinilakodi, H., & Grayson, R. (2011). Citation-related reliability analysis for a pilot sample of
underground coal mines. Accident Analysis And Prevention, 43(3), 1015-1021.
doi:10.1016/j.aap.2010.11.033
Kowalski, K. (1995). A human component to consider in your emergency management plans:
The critical incident stress factor. Safety Science, 20(1), 115-123. doi:10.1016/09257535(94)00072-B
Laurence, D. (2005). Safety rules and regulations on mine sites--The problem and a solution.
Journal Of Safety Research, 36(1), 39-50. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2004.11.004
Legge, J., & Burgess-Limerick, R. (2007). Reliability of the JobFit System Pre-Employment
Functional Assessment tool. Work: Journal Of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation,
28(4), 299-312.
Lordan, E. J. (2005). The Sago Mine disaster: A crisis in crisis communications. Public Relations
Quarterly, 50(4), p10-12.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 48
Madsen, P. M. (2009). These lives will not be lost in vain: Organizational learning from disaster
in U.S. coal mining. Organization Science, 20(5), 861-875. doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0396
McKenzie, K., Scott, D., Campbell, M., & McClure, R. (2010). The use of narrative text for injury
surveillance research: A systematic review. Accident Analysis And Prevention, 42(2), 354363. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2009.09.020
Page, K. (2009). Blood on the coal: The effect of organizational size and differentiation on coal
mine accidents. Journal Of Safety Research, 40(2), 85-95. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2008.12.007
Paul, P. S., & Maiti, J. J. (2007). The role of behavioral factors on safety management in
underground mines. Safety Science, 45(4), 449-471. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2006.07.006
Peng, Y., Zhang, Y., Tang, Y., & Li, S. (2011). An incident information management framework
based on data integration, data mining, and multi-criteria decision making. Decision
Support Systems, 51(2), 316-327. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2010.11.025
Poplin, G. S., Miller, H. B., Ranger-Moore, J., Bofinger, C. M., Kurzius-Spencer, M., Harris, R. B., &
Burgess, J. L. (2008). International evaluation of injury rates in coal mining: A
comparison of risk and compliance-based regulatory approaches. Safety Science, 46(8),
1196-1204. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2007.06.025
Qing-gui, C., Kai, L., Ye-jiao, L., Qi-hua, S., & Jian, Z. (2012). Risk management and workers'
safety behavior control in coal mine. Safety Science, 50(4), 909-913.
doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2011.08.005
Rolston, J. (2010). Risky business: Neoliberalism and workplace safety in Wyoming coal mines.
Human Organization, 69(4), 331-342.
Schimmoeller, M. (2007). The Sago Mine Disaster: Can Lightning Strike Twice?. Public Relations
Quarterly, 52(2), 38-42.
Stephenson, M. T., Quick, B. L., Witte, K., Vaught, C., Booth-Butterfield, S., & Patel, D. (2009).
Conversations among coal miners in a campaign to promote hearing protection. Journal
Of Applied Communication Research, 37(3), 317-337. doi:10.1080/00909880903025895
Vaught, C., & Wiehagen, W. J. (1991). Escape from a mine fire: Emergent perspective and work
group behavior. Journal Of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(4), 452-474.
doi:10.1177/0021886391274006
Weyman, A. K., & Clarke, D. D. (2003). Investigating the influence of organizational role on
perceptions of risk in deep coal mines. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 404-412.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.404
MASS/SCHOOL/RAMPAGE SHOOTINGS:
Alvis-Banks, D. (2008). When hometown news becomes worldwide news. Traumatology, 14(1),
85-88. doi:10.1177/1534765608316137
Fallahi, C. R., & Lesik, S. A. (2009). The effects of vicarious exposure to the recent massacre at
Virginia Tech. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, And Policy, 1(3), 220230. doi:10.1037/a0015052
Fallahi, C. R., Austad, C. S., Fallon, M., & Leishman, L. (2009). A survey of perceptions of the
Virginia Tech tragedy. Journal of School Violence, 8 (2), 120-135.
Figley, C. R., & Jones, R. (2008). The 2007 Virginia Tech shootings: Identification and application
of lessons learned. Traumatology, 14(1), 4-7. doi:10.1177/1534765608319921
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 49
Fox, J., & Savage, J. (2009). Mass murder goes to college: An examination of changes on college
campuses following Virginia Tech. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(10), 1465-1485.
doi:10.1177/0002764209332558
Fredland, N. M. (2008). Nurturing hostile environments: The problem of school violence. Family
& Community Health: The Journal Of Health Promotion & Maintenance, 31(Suppl1), S32S41.
Frymer, B. (2009). The media spectacle of Columbine: Alienated youth as an object of fear.
American Behavioral Scientist, 52(10), 1387-1404. doi:10.1177/0002764209332554
Geller, E. (2008). The tragic shootings at Virginia Tech: Personal perspectives, prospects, and
preventive potentials. Traumatology, 14(1), 8-20. doi:10.1177/1534765607310223
Gervich, C. D. (2008). Loneliness and belonging: A reflection on the meanings and values of
social networks in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings. Traumatology, 14(1), 32-42.
doi:10.1177/1534765607312689
Hong, J., Cho, H., & Lee, A. (2010). Revisiting the Virginia Tech shootings: An ecological systems
analysis. Journal Of Loss And Trauma, 15(6), 561-575.
doi:10.1080/15325024.2010.519285
Hughes, M., Brymer, M., Chiu, W., Fairbank, J. A., Jones, R. T., Pynoos, R. S., & ... Kessler, R. C.
(2011). Posttraumatic stress among students after the shootings at Virginia Tech.
Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, And Policy, 3(4), 403-411.
doi:10.1037/a0024565
Knoll, J. (2010). The 'pseudocommando' mass murderer: Part II, the language of revenge.
Journal Of The American Academy Of Psychiatry And The Law, 38(2), 263-272.
Langman, P. (2009). Rampage school shooters: A typology. Aggression And Violent Behavior,
14(1), 79-86. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2008.10.003
Larkin, R. W. (2009). The Columbine legacy: Rampage shootings as political acts. American
Behavioral Scientist, 52(9), 1309-1326. doi:10.1177/0002764209332548
Leary, M. R., Kowalski, R. M., Smith, L., & Phillips, S. (2003). Teasing, rejection, and violence:
Case studies of the school shootings. Aggressive Behavior, 29(3), 202-214.
doi:10.1002/ab.10061
Lickel, B., Schmader, T., & Hamilton, D. L. (2003). A case of collective responsibility: Who else
was to blame for the Columbine High School shootings?. Personality And Social
Psychology Bulletin, 29(2), 194-204. doi:10.1177/0146167202239045
Littleton, H. L., Grills-Taquechel, A. E., Axsom, D., Bye, K., & Buck, K. S. (2011). Prior sexual
trauma and adjustment following the Virginia Tech campus shootings: Examination of
the mediating role of schemas and social support. Psychological Trauma: Theory,
Research, Practice, And Policy, doi:10.1037/a0025270
Littleton, H., Axsom, D., & Grills-Taquechel, A. E. (2011). Longitudinal evaluation of the
relationship between maladaptive trauma coping and distress: Examination following
the mass shooting at Virginia Tech. Anxiety, Stress & Coping: An International Journal,
24(3), 273-290. doi:10.1080/10615806.2010.500722
Markward, M. J., Cline, S. S., & Markward, N. J. (2001). Group socialization, the internet and
school shootings. International Journal Of Adolescence And Youth, 10(1-2), 135-146.
McGee, J. P., & DeBernardo, C. R. (1999). The classroom avenger: A behavioral profile of school
based shootings. The Forensic Examiner, 8(5-6), 16-18.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 50
Mulvey, E. P., & Cauffman, E. (2001). The inherent limits of predicting school violence. American
Psychologist, 56(10), 797-802. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.10.797
Newman, K., & Fox, C. (2009). Repeat tragedy: Rampage shooting in American high school and
college settings, 2002-2008. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(9), 1286-1308.
doi:10.1177/0002764209332546
Ryan, J., & Hawdon, J. (2008). From individual to community: The “framing” of 4-16 and the
display of social solidarity. Traumatology, 14(1), 43-51. doi:10.1177/1534765607312686
Schafer, J. A., Heiple, E., Giblin, M. J., & Burruss, G. r. (2010). Critical incident preparedness and
response on post-secondary campuses. Journal Of Criminal Justice, 38(3), 311-317.
doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.03.005
Serazio, M. (2010). Shooting for Fame: Spectacular Youth, Web 2.0 Dystopia, and the Celebrity
Anarchy of Generation Mash-Up. Communication, Culture & Critique, 3(3), 416-434.
doi:10.1111/j.1753-9137.2010.01078.x
Sumiala, J. (2011). Circulating Communities Online: The Case of the Kauhajoki School Shooting.
M/C Journal, 14(2), 8.
Tonso, K. L. (2009). Violent masculinities as tropes for school shooters: The Montréal Massacre,
the Columbine Attack and rethinking schools. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(9),
1266-1285. doi:10.1177/0002764209332545
Vicary, A. M., & Fraley, R. (2010). Student reactions to the shootings at Virginia Tech and
Northern Illinois University: Does sharing grief and support over the Internet affect
recovery?. Personality And Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(11), 1555-1563.
doi:10.1177/0146167210384880
Wang, J., & Hutchins, H. M. (2010). Crisis management in higher education: What have we
learned from Virginia Tech?. Advances In Developing Human Resources, 12(5), 552-572.
doi:10.1177/1523422310394433
Columbine:
Addington, L. A. (2009). Cops and cameras: Public school security as a policy response to
Columbine. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(10), 1426-1446.
doi:10.1177/0002764209332556
Altheide, D. L. (2009). The Columbine shootings and the discourse of fear. American Behavioral
Scientist, 52(10), 1354-1370. doi:10.1177/0002764209332552
Aronson, E. (2004). How the Columbine High School Tragedy Could Have Been Prevented. The
Journal Of Individual Psychology, 60(4), 355-360.
Ballard, C., & Brady, L. (2007). Violence prevention in Georgia's rural public school systems: A
comparison of perceptions of school superintendents 1995-2005. Journal Of School
Violence, 6(4), 105-129. doi:10.1300/J202v06n04_06
Birkland, T. A., & Lawrence, R. G. (2009). Media framing and policy change after Columbine.
American Behavioral Scientist, 52(10), 1405-1425. doi:10.1177/0002764209332555
Claassen, C., Kashner, T., Kashner, T. K., Xuan, L., & Larkin, G. L. (2011). Psychiatric emergency
“surge capacity” following acts of terrorism and mass violence with high media impact:
What is required?. General Hospital Psychiatry, 33(3), 287-293.
doi:10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2011.01.015
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 51
Crepeau-Hobson, M., Filaccio, M., & Gottfried, L. (2005). Violence prevention after columbine:
A survey of high school mental health professionals. Children & Schools, 27(3), 157-165.
Culley, M. R., Conkling, M., Emshoff, J., Blakely, C., & Gorman, D. (2006). Environmental and
Contextual Influences on School Violence and its Prevention. The Journal Of Primary
Prevention, 27(3), 217-227. doi:10.1007/s10935-006-0033-0
Fritzon, K., & Brun, A. (2005). Beyond Columbine: A faceted model of school-associated
homicide. Psychology, Crime & Law, 11(1), 53-71. doi:10.1080/1068316042000209314
Glick, R., Hirshbein, L. D., Patel, N., & Hughes, D. (2004). How Should Emergency Psychiatrists
Respond to School Violence?. Psychiatric Services, 55(3), 223-224.
doi:10.1176/appi.ps.55.3.223
Heinen, E., Webb-Dempsey, J., Moore, L., McClellan, C., & Friebel, C. (2007). Safety matters:
How one district addressed safety concerns. Journal Of School Violence, 6(3), 113-130.
doi:10.1300/J202v06n03_07
Hong, J., Cho, H., Allen-Meares, P., & Espelage, D. L. (2011). The social ecology of the Columbine
High School shootings. Children And Youth Services Review, 33(6), 861-868.
doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.12.005
Hsiang Iris, C., & McCombs, M. (2004). Media salience and the process of framing: coverage of
the Columbine school shootings. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(1),
22-35.
Levy, M., Haglund, P., Plaut, L., Emde, R., Stewart, M., Shaw, R., & ... Edwards, W. (2004).
Healing after Columbine: Reflections of psychoanalytic responders to community
trauma. Journal Of The American Psychoanalytic Association, 52(3), 759-781.
doi:10.1177/00030651040520041401
Mowder, M. H., & Orland, S. L. (2006). The ACT against violence training program: Targeting
pre-service elementary school teachers. Journal Of Early Childhood And Infant
Psychology, 239-50.
Muschert, G. W. (2009). Frame-changing in the media coverage of a school shooting: The rise of
Columbine as a national concern. The Social Science Journal, 46(1), 164-170.
doi:10.1016/j.soscij.2008.12.014
Muschert, G. W., & Spencer, J. (2009). The lesson of Columbine, Part I. American Behavioral
Scientist, 52(9), 1223-1226. doi:10.1177/0002764209332550
Muschert, G. W., & Spencer, J. (2009). The lessons of Columbine, part II. American Behavioral
Scientist, 52(10), 1351-1353. doi:10.1177/0002764209332551
Ogle, J., Eckman, M., & Leslie, C. (2003). Appearance cues and the shootings at Columbine High:
Construction of social problem in the print media. Sociological Inquiry, 73(1), 1-27.
doi:10.1111/1475-682X.00039
Scharrer, E., Weidman, L. M., & Bissell, K. L. (2003). Pointing the Finger of Blame: News Media
Coverage of Popular-Culture Culpability. Journalism & Communication Monographs,
5(2), 49-98.
Simon, A. (2007). Application of fad theory to copycat crimes: Quantitative data following the
Columbine massacre. Psychological Reports, 100(3,Pt2), 1233-1244.
doi:10.2466/PR0.100.3.1233-1244
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 52
Stevick, E., & Levinson, B. U. (2003). From Noncompliance to Columbine: Capturing Student
Perspectives to Understand Noncompliance and Violence in Public Schools. The Urban
Review, 35(4), 323-349. doi:10.1023/B:URRE.0000017533.49159.6e
Strauss, C. (2007). Blaming for Columbine: Conceptions of agency in the contemporary United
States. Current Anthropology, 48(6), 807-832. doi:10.1086/520975
Vecchi, G. M. (2009). Conflict and crisis communication: Workplace and school violence,
Stockholm Syndrome, and abnormal psychology. Annals Of The American Psychotherapy
Assn, 12(3), 30-39.
Veil, S., & Mitchell, K. (2010). Terror Management Theory: Promoting Tolerance in Campus
Safety Campaigns. International Journal Of Strategic Communication, 4(4), 207-224.
doi:10.1080/1553118X.2010.515541
FOOD BORNE ILLNESSES:
Brady, J. T., Li, P., & Brown, D. (2009). Consumer perception of food-borne illness risks before
and after the 2006 E. Coli events. Family And Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 37(4),
456-465. doi:10.1177/1077727X09333103
Gordon, J. (2003). Risk Communication and Foodborne Illness: Message Sponsorship and
Attempts to Stimulate Perceptions of Risk. Risk Analysis, 23(6), 1287-1296.
doi:10.1111/j.0272-4332.2003.00401.x
Greenberg, J., & Elliott, C. (2009). A Cold Cut Crisis: Listeriosis, Maple Leaf Foods, and the
Politics of Apology. Canadian Journal Of Communication, 34(2), 189-204.
Jacob, C. J., Lok, C., Morley, K., & Powell, D. A. (2011). Government management of two mediafacilitated crises involving dioxin contamination of food. Public Understanding Of
Science, 20(2), 261-269. doi:10.1177/0963662509355737
Jacob, C., Mathiasen, L., & Powell, D. (2010). Designing effective messages for microbial food
safety hazards. Food Control, 21(1), 1-6. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2009.04.011
Jaques, T. (2011). Managing issues in the face of risk uncertainty: lessons 20 years after the Alar
controversy. Journal Of Communication Management, 15(1), 41-54.
doi:10.1108/13632541111105240
Millner, A. G., Veil, S. R., & Sellnow, T. L. (2011). Proxy communication in crisis response. Public
Relations Review, 37(1), 74-76. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.10.005
Novak, J. M., & Sellnow, T. L. (2009). Reducing Organizational Risk through Participatory
Communication. Journal Of Applied Communication Research, 37(4), 349-373.
doi:10.1080/00909880903233168
Nucci, M. L., Cuite, C. L., & Hallman, W. K. (2009). When Good Food Goes Bad: Television
Network News and the Spinach Recall of 2006. Science Communication, 31(2), 238-265.
Read, K. (2007). "Corporate pathos": new approaches to quell hostile publics. Journal Of
Communication Management, 11(4), 332-347.
Stephens, K. K., & Malone, P. C. (2009). If the Organizations Won't Give Us Information...: The
Use of Multiple New Media for Crisis Technical Translation and Dialogue. Journal Of
Public Relations Research, 21(2), 229-239. doi:10.1080/10627260802557605
Veil, S., Veil, S. R., Liu, M., Erickson, S. L., & Sellnow, T. L. (2005). Too Hot to Handle:
Competency Constrains Character in Chi-Chi's Green Onion Crisis. Public Relations
Quarterly, 50(4), 19-22.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 53
Vidoloff, K. G., & Petrun, E. L. (2010). Communication Successes and Constraints: Analysis of the
2008 Salmonella Saintpaul Foodborne Illness Outbreak. Northwest Journal Of
Communication, (39), 65-90.
DISEASE VECTORS/OUTBREAKS:
Detail Only Available By: Tai, Z., & Sun, T. (2007) Media dependencies in a changing media
environment: the case of the 2003 SARS epidemic in China. New Media & Society, 9,
987-1009.
NUCLEAR POWER:
Bazerman, C. (2001). Nuclear information: One rhetorical moment in the construction of the
Information Age. Written Communication, 18(3), 259-295.
doi:10.1177/0741088301018003002
Carvalho, P. R., Vidal, M. R., & de Carvalho, E. F. (2007). Nuclear power plant communications in
normative and actual practice: A field study of control room operators' communications.
Human Factors And Ergonomics In Manufacturing, 17(1), 43-78. doi:10.1002/hfm.20062
Chung, Y., Yoon, W., & Min, D. (2009). A model-based framework for the analysis of team
communication in nuclear power plants. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 94(6),
1030-1040. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2008.11.010
Corbett, J. B. (1998). Media, Bureaucracy, and the Success of Social Protest: Newspaper
Coverage of Environmental Movement Groups. Mass Communication & Society, 1(1/2),
41.
Culley, M. R., Ogley-Oliver, E., Carton, A. D., & Street, J. C. (2010). Media framing of proposed
nuclear reactors: An analysis of print media. Journal Of Community & Applied Social
Psychology, 20(6), 497-512. doi:10.1002/casp.1056
Dombrowski, P. M. (2011). Practicing "Safe" Technical Communication. Journal Of Technical
Writing & Communication, 41(3), 255-270. doi:10.2190/TW.41.3.c
Entman, R. M., & Rojecki, A. (1993). Freezing Out the Public: Elite and Media Framing of the U.S.
Anti-Nuclear Movement. Political Communication, 10(2), 155-173.
Harris, A. L., & Corner, A. (2011). Communicating environmental risks: Clarifying the severity
effect in interpretations of verbal probability expressions. Journal Of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory, And Cognition, 37(6), 1571-1578. doi:10.1037/a0024195
Kim, S., Park, J., & Kim, Y. (2011). Some insights about the characteristics of communications
observed from the off‐normal conditions of nuclear power plants. Human Factors And
Ergonomics In Manufacturing & Service Industries, 21(4), 361-378.
doi:10.1002/hfm.20270
Kirchsteiger, C. (2004). Technical communication on status in developing a compass for risk
assessment. Safety Science, 42(2), 159-165. doi:10.1016/S0925-7535(03)00024-9
Lange, J. I. (1990). Refusal to Compromise: The Case of Earth First!. Western Journal Of Speech
Communication: WJSC, 54(4), 473-494.
Lin, C., Hsieh, T., Tsai, P., Yang, C., & Yenn, T. (2011). Development of a team workload
assessment technique for the main control room of advanced nuclear power plants.
Human Factors And Ergonomics In Manufacturing & Service Industries, 21(4), 397-411.
doi:10.1002/hfm.20247
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 54
Luoma-aho, V., & Vos, M. (2009). Monitoring the complexities: Nuclear power and public
opinion. Public Relations Review, 35(2), 120-122. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.01.013
Matsumoto, T., Shiomi, T., & Nakayachi, K. (2005). Evaluation of risk communication from the
perspective of the information source: Focusing on public relations officers for nuclear
power generation. The Japanese Journal Of Social Psychology, 20(3), 201-207.
Mirel, B. (1994). Debating nuclear energy: Theories of risk and purposes of communication.
Technical Communication Quarterly, 3(1), 41.
O’Connor, P., O’Dea, A., Flin, R., & Belton, S. (2008). Identifying the team skills required by
nuclear power plant operations personnel. International Journal Of Industrial
Ergonomics, 38(11-12), 1028-1037. doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2008.01.014
Parkhill, K. A., Henwood, K. L., Pidgeon, N. F., & Simmons, P. P. (2011). Laughing it off? Humour,
affect and emotion work in communities living with nuclear risk. British Journal Of
Sociology, 62(2), 324-346. doi:10.1111/j.1468-4446.2011.01367.x
Takano, K., Sunaoshi, W., & Suzuki, K. (2000). Total simulation of operator team behavior in
emergencies at nuclear power plants. Aviation, Space, And Environmental Medicine,
71(9,Sect2,Suppl), A140-A144.
Vigsø, O., & von Stedingk Wigren, M. (2010). Character as defence: A study of Vattenfall's
communication following an incident at the nuclear plant at Forsmark, Sweden.
Corporate Communications, 15(4), 365-379. doi:10.1108/13563281011085484
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 55
CONCEPTUAL LENSES FOR UNDERSTANDING CRISIS COMMUNICATION
HI
T
R
A
N
S
P
A
R
E
N
C
Y
HI AGENCY
Interpersonal Influence:
 Focal actors: Leaders, advisers, top teams,
survivors
 Dominant communication mode: face-toface
 Key functions: Direct action, inform decision
makers, set tone, console and counsel
 Key issues: Perspective, accountability,
groupthink
 Strengths: Proximity, relevance
 Limitations: Lack of overall perspective
Inter-organizational Networking:
LO
T
R
A
N
S
P
A
R
E
N
C
Y
 Focal actors: Boundary brokers,
organizational leaders
 Dominant communication mode: Boundary
spanning
 Key functions: Allocate resources,
coordinate action
 Key issues: Intelligence, competition,
“wickedness”
 Strengths: Cooperative action
 Limitations: Turf boundaries and battles,
bureau-political blaming, time and
stalemate, lack of overall perspective
LO TECHNOLOGY
LO AGENCY
Media Relations:
HI
 Focal actors: Spin doctors
 Dominant communication mode: Mass
communication
 Key functions: Promote and protect
organizational reputation and interests,
disseminate news, gain market shares
 Key issues: Credibility, authenticity
 Strengths: Reach, visibility
 Limitations: Distortion, sensationalism,
lack of overall perspective
C
H
R
O
N
O
L
O
G
Y
Technology Showcase:
 Focal actors: Cybergeeks, technocrats
 Dominant communication mode: IT
networking
 Key functions: Demonstrate and validate
technology, disseminate information
 Key issues: Accessibility, overload,
technological failure, junk, e-governance,
democratic governance versus security
 Strengths: Speed, uniformity
 Limitations: Technological failure,
communicative redundancy, techno stress,
vulnerability and marginalization, lack of
overall perspective
LO
C
H
R
O
N
O
L
O
G
Y
HI TECHNOLOGY
Source: Garnett, J. L., & Kouzmin, A. (2007). Communicating throughout Katrina: Competing and
complementary conceptual lenses on crisis communication. Public Administration Review, 67,
171-188.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 56
A SELECT SUMMARY OF MEDIA PROS & CONS IN DISASTERS/CRISES
Source: Andersen, & Spitzberg (2009). Myths and maxims of risk and crisis communication. In
O’Hair & Heath (Eds.), Handbook of risk and crisis communication (pp. 207-228). LEA.
Television
Advantages:
 Most prominent disaster information
source (Hurricane Danny, San Diego
fires)
 Immediacy, visual emphasis
 Less reliant on language
 Surprisingly resilient (911: 8 stations
but 90% had cable)
Convergent Media: E-mail
Advantages:
 Sent instantaneously to large, preselected audience
 Rapidly adaptable to circumstance
 Resilient to infrastructure damage
(911: mayor’s Chief of staff contacted
office workers when phones didn’t
work)
Disadvantages:
 Sound byte compression simplifies complex
disasters (e.g., Chernobyl)
 Vulnerable to infrastructure and power grid
damage
 Disparities between local and
national/international coverage
 Claims-makers have no control over
gatekeepers and public exposure
Disadvantages:
 Not widely diffused & adopted
 Not immediately available for many
 Typing and accessing may be untimely in
disaster
 Dependent on literacy of audience
Convergent Media: Internet & WWW
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
 Potential for relatively instant exposure  1% learned of 911 via Internet
to large audience
 Internet still experiences congestion (911
 Potential for emergent therapeutic &
video log-jam, FEMA site logged over 2 million
response communities
hits on 911)
 Involving, immediacy & visual
 Accessibility to terrorists (911 websites had to
interactive format
be taken down)
 Telecommuting & sheltering in place
 Potential for excessive or distorted
information
 Extraordinarily resilient to
infrastructure damage (e.g., 911)
 Current disaster sites lack interactivity &
timeliness
 Blackberry’s & VoIP show potential
 Dependent on literacy of audience
 Potential for controlling rumor &
misinformation
 Internet itself is a terrorist target
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 57
Conventional Radio
Advantages:
 A prominent source of disaster
information
 Relatively high immediacy & high
availability/access (e.g., Loma Prieta:
rerouting traffic)
 Significant local presence & knowledge
 Promotes emergent therapeutic
communities
 Resilient to power disruptions (radios
survived 911 intact)
 Adaptable (12,000 shifted to all news
during 911)
 Cal. Emergency Services Radio System,
SECURE, RACES, Law Enf. Mutual Aid
Radio System, HAM, ATS, etc.
Two-Way Radio & Paging Systems
Advantages:
 Potential to reach large audience,
especially responders
 Significant relative range
 HAM & CB radios (e.g., REACT, RACES)
assist in diffusion (e.g., Beverly Hills
supper club fire, Fort Worth tornado)
Disadvantages:
 Limited gate-keeping, permitting distorted
information on air
 Local stations often controlled by
headquarters out of region, diminishing
sensitivity, expertise, and access from disaster
location
 Still tends to take less prominent role relative
to television
Disadvantages:
 Not widely used or diffused
 Not widely interoperable (e.g., Mt. St. Helens,
911, S.D. fires)
 Limited range due to circumstance (e.g., 911building interference)
 Management problems (i.e., who gets to talk
to whom when)
Warning Systems & Sirens
Advantages:
 Historically proven very effective in
many natural disasters (e.g., Ft. Worth
tornado)
Disadvantages:
 Do not provide specific information on type of
hazard or response
 Limited to those with prior experience
 Even those with prior experience may have
become habituated (jaded)
 Color-coded systems have proven widely
misunderstood and useless for public
response
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 58
Mobile/Cellular Telephones
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
 Widely diffused & accessible in
 Limited footprints of coverage & signal
population
 Still vulnerable to infrastructure damage (e.g.,
 Low-tech, highly operable
911: 15 sites lost)
 Resilient to infrastructure damage (e.g.,  Vulnerable to congestion (911, TWA flight
COWs during 911)
800—Long Island)
 Relatively immediate channel of
 At present, no prioritizing or screening of
communication
traffic
 Limited security (i.e., 3rd parties can listen in)
Standard Telephone & Hotlines
Advantages:
 Widely diffused & accessible
 Low-tech, highly operable
 Resilient to some types of
infrastructure damage (e.g., 911:
phones operated despite 300,000 & 2
offices down)
 Hotlines easy to set up & program
Disadvantages:
 Immobility a constraint during many disasters
 Limited exposure & audience (i.e., 1 person at
a time)
 Susceptible to congestion (e.g., 911: 1/3rd
experienced problems)
 Susceptible to infrastructure damage (e.g.,
lines being down)
 Hotlines often ill-managed, under-staffed, &
insufficiently updated
Word-of-Mouth, Diffusion, & Social Networks
Advantages:
 Primary factor in determining public
response (e.g., 70% Washington
volcano, > half in hurricanes Danny,
Alicia)
 Serves essential confirmation function
 Widely diffused (e.g., 911: average
person told 4.8 others)
Disadvantages:
 Varies in role by type of disaster, time of day,
& immediacy of threat
 The more technical the threat, the less useful
& accurate the source
 Subject to biases & misinformation (e.g.,
Niigata earthquake rumor)
Officers, Public Officials, Forums in the Field
Advantages:
 Sources in the field tend to be viewed
as highly credible
 Sources in the field tend to be effective
in achieving public compliance to
instructions (esp. commands)
Disadvantages:
 Limited coverage (e.g., hurricanes, eruptions)
 Time & resource expensive
 Slow, even impractical in certain situations
 Public forums difficult to manage agenda
 Dependent on matching language of
information with community
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 59
Newspapers
Advantages:
 Medium of choice for detailed,
complex, in-depth understanding of
disaster
 Relatively permanent medium (i.e., can
be saved, transported)
Disadvantages:
 Relatively static & slow (i.e., “yesterday’s
news”)
 Limited to literate public audience
 Still often not sufficiently in-depth (e.g.,
Chernobyl, TMI)
 Sometimes understaffed relative to disaster
(e.g., The Oklahoman)
Flyers, Handouts, Inserts, Billboards, Etc.
Advantages:
 Relatively inexpensive
 Appropriate for short-term, onemessage efforts (e.g., preparedness)
 Relatively permanent medium (i.e., can
be saved, transported)
Disadvantages:
 Limited to literate public audience
 Very limited exposure in information dense
environment
 Untimely relative to disaster
Direct Observation
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
 Immediately intuitive, iconic, and
 Promotes “disaster pornography” or
understandable (e.g., seeing neighbors
voyeurism (e.g., flooding to see the flood)
evacuate)
 First-hand observers of disaster often have
 Important factor in perceived readiness
the worst vantage point for accurate
and efficacy
comprehension (e.g., 911)
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 60
A PROPOSITIONAL SURVEY OF CRISIS/DISASTER COMMUNICATION
AXIOM: ALL DISASTERS ARE SIMILAR IN IMPORTANT ASPECTS.
 Axiom: All disasters are “local” in character.
 Axiom: Information is always incomplete in disaster situations.
o Proposition: Slowly unfolding disasters demand more media consumption and
confirmation than sudden disasters.
o Proposition: The more complex or technical the risk or disaster, the more media
messages will be accepted by the public.
 Axiom: Public communication is a vital tool in responding to any disaster event.
THE SOURCE(S) OF RISK AND DISASTER MESSAGES
 Axiom: People are skeptical of threats, threat warnings, and recommendations.
o Proposition: Warnings are most credible when communicated by high credibility sources
and repeated through many media.
o Proposition: The public prefers its information directly from a known and trusted source.
o Proposition: A unified/centralized source of authoritative information is more competent
than diffuse information dissemination.
THE CONTENT AND DESIGN OF RISK AND DISASTER MESSAGES
o Proposition: Timely, accurate, specific, sufficient, consistent, and understandable
information messages are more competent than delayed, outdated, inaccurate, general,
incomplete, inconsistent, or complicated messages.
o Proposition: Simpler messages reach an entire population better than complex
messages.
o Proposition: Personally relevant messages are more competent than messages cast
more generically.
o Proposition: Messages with actionable responses are more competent than messages
without actionable responses.
o Proposition: Messages designed to gain compliance are more competent when
employing moderate levels of fear appeals compared to low or high levels of fear appeal.
 Axiom: People seek confirmation of threat warnings and their response depends on the
message confirmation.
o Proposition: Messages that include or connect to family members are more competent in
motivating functional public response than messages excluding family members.
o Proposition: The more frequent the prior warnings, the less people attend to them.
THE PROCESS OF RISK AND DISASTER MESSAGES
o Proposition: Redundant communication across media is more competent than reliance
on single media and sources.
o Proposition: Interactive (i.e., “two-way”) communication is more competent than
unidirectional communication.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 61
THE CONTEXT OF RISK AND DISASTER MESSAGES
o Proposition: Competent response to disasters/crises is moderated by family proximity.
o Proposition: The more agencies responsible for managing a crisis, the more likely there
will be communication errors and problems.
THE AUDIENCE OF RISK AND DISASTER MESSAGES
o Proposition: All disasters increase uncertainty, public media consumption, and
information-seeking.
 Axiom: People informally diffuse information, gossip, rumor, and communication about
disasters, at work, in social networks, in families, to children, and through social media.
o Proposition: Competent response to disaster and crisis communication is moderated by
the socioeconomic status of the relevant target populations.
o Proposition: Most people experience inaction and have an optimistic bias regarding
disasters.
o Proposition: The more involuntary, uncontrollable, and irreversible the risks, the more
motivating relevant risk messages are: Involuntary exposure to risks, exposure to risks
that could have been averted under appropriate circumstances, and risks that cannot be
reversed are less acceptable, and more arousing.
o Proposition: The more salient, graphic, and specific the harms from risks are, the more
motivating relevant risk messages are.
o Proposition: The larger the scope of harm, and the more horrific the harm, the more
motivating risk messages are.
o Proposition: The less familiar and well-understood a risk, the more motivating relevant
risk messages are.
o Proposition: The more a risk threatens children, the more motivating risk messages are:
The more a disaster targets children relative to adults, the more arousing the risks will
be.
o Proposition: The more the source of a risk message is trusted, the more motivating
relevant risk messages are.
o Proposition: The more media attention a risk message receives, the more motivating
relevant risk messages are.
o Proposition: The more personally relevant a disaster or risk, the more motivating
relevant risk messages are.
o Proposition: The more unfair, inequitable, immoral, and unethical a disaster, the more
motivating relevant risk messages are.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 62
THE MEDIA USED TO DELIVER RISK AND DISASTER MESSAGES
 Axiom: Local media are vital in an emergency or disaster.
 Axiom: Radio is a vital primary and supplemental source of communication during disasters.
 Axiom: The Internet and social media are becoming increasingly important media for
diffusion of relevant disaster/crisis information/messages.
o Proposition: Media are partially substitutable in their functional effectiveness.
o Proposition: Multiple media provide the most effective crisis communication.
o Proposition: Television is the most robust, multi-channeled communication medium
during a crisis.
 Axiom: Disasters tend to reveal a reactive media cycle.
 Axiom: The media face constraints in disseminating disaster information:
o The media are themselves dependent on infrastructure to operate.
o Media are disproportionately accessible and accessed depending on time of day or cycle
of communication production and dissemination.
o Media are constrained by the fact that not all relevant populations understand the
language of message content and dissemination.
o Media tend to be selective and biased in the ways in which they present disaster relevant
information. The “if it bleeds, it leads” tendency leads to a variety of gate-keeping biases
in the public image of personal risk in a disaster situation.
o There are upper limits to the effect of media.
o Proposition: Exposure to media coverage of a disaster is associated with distress.
 Axiom: There are significant disparities across certain populations’ access to various
media.
 Axiom: The media are a tool of terrorists as well as responders
RECOMMENDATIONS:
 Enlist help from physicians and the health care system.
 Have a ready source for outsource phone banking of calls.
 Poll feedback.
 Use triage of victims—people tend to accept its value.
 People prefer a choice of responses.
 People want planning.
 Create a “buddy system” between PIOs and scientists.
 Be ready to engage in frequent and timely “telebriefings.”
 Develop a central repository of information about the disaster to refer media inquiries to
that is coordinated and ready via website.
 Have “technology go kits” for field communication teams.
 Develop a standardized form for distributing daily information to the media.
Adapted from: Andersen, & Spitzberg (2009). Myths and maxims of risk and crisis
communication. In O’Hair & Heath (Eds.), Handbook of risk and crisis communication
(pp. 207-228). LEA.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 63
SITUATIONAL CRISIS COMMUNICATION THEORY: CRISIS TYPES BY CRISIS CLUSTERS

“Victim cluster: In these crisis types, the organization is also a victim of the crisis. (Weak
attributions of crisis responsibility = Mild reputational threat)
o Natural disaster: Acts of nature damage an organization such as an earthquake.
o Rumor: False and damaging information about an organization is being circulated.
o Workplace violence: Current or former employee attacks current employees onsite.
o Product tampering/Malevolence: External agent causes damage to an organization.

Accidental cluster: In these crisis types, the organizational actions leading to the crisis were
unintentional. (Minimal attributions of crisis responsibility = Moderate reputational threat)
o Challenges: Stakeholders claim an organization is operating in an inappropriate
manner.
o Technical-error accidents: A technology or equipment failure causes an industrial
accident.
o Technical-error product harm: A technology or equipment failure causes a product to
be recalled.

Preventable cluster: In these crisis types, the organization knowingly placed people at risk,
took inappropriate actions or violated a law/regulation. (Strong attributions of crisis
responsibility = Severe reputational threat)
o Human-error accidents: Human error causes an industrial accident.
o Human-error product harm: Human error causes a product to be recalled.
o Organizational misdeed with no injuries: Stakeholders are deceived without injury.
o Organizational misdeed management misconduct: Laws or regulations are violated
by management.
o Organizational misdeed with injuries: Stakeholders are placed at risk by
management and injuries occur.”
Source:
Coombs, W. (2007). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and
application of situational crisis communication theory." Corporate Reputation Review:
An International Journal, 10 (3), 163-176.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 64
SITUATIONAL CRISIS COMMUNICATION THEORY: CRISIS RESPONSE STRATEGIES
“Primary crisis response strategies:

Deny crisis response strategies:
o Attack the accuser : Crisis manager confronts the person or group claiming
something is wrong with the organization.
o Denial : Crisis manager asserts that there is no crisis.
o Scapegoat : Crisis manager blames some person or group outside of the organization
for the crisis.

Diminish crisis response strategies
o Excuse: Crisis manager minimizes organizational responsibility by denying intent to
do harm and/or claiming inability to control the events that triggered the crisis.
o Justification : Crisis manager minimizes the perceived damage caused by the crisis.

Rebuild crisis response strategies
o Compensation : Crisis manager offers money or other gifts to victims.
o Apology : Crisis manager indicates the organization takes full responsibility for the
crisis and asks stakeholders for forgiveness.

Secondary crisis response strategies
o Bolstering crisis response strategies
o Reminder : Tell stakeholders about the past good works of the organization.
o Ingratiation : Crisis manager praises stakeholders and/or reminds them of past good
works by the organization.
o Victimage : Crisis managers remind stakeholders that the organization is a victim of
the crisis too.”
Source:
Coombs, W. (2007). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and
application of situational crisis communication theory." Corporate Reputation Review:
An International Journal, 10 (3), 163-176.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 65
SITUATIONAL CRISIS COMMUNICATION THEORY:
CRISIS RESPONSE STRATEGY GUIDELINES
1. “Informing and adjusting information alone can be enough when crises have minimal
attributions of crisis responsibility (victim crises), no history of similar crises and a
neutral or positive prior relationship reputation.
2. Victimage can be used as part of the response for workplace violence, product
tampering, natural disasters and rumors.
3. Diminish crisis response strategies should be used for crises with minimal attributions of
crisis responsibility (victim crises) coupled with a history of similar crises and/or negative
prior relationship reputation.
4. Diminish crisis response strategies should be used for crises with low attributions of
crisis responsibility (accident crises), which have no history of similar crises, and a
neutral or positive prior relationship reputation.
5. Rebuild crisis response strategies should be used for crises with low attributions of crisis
responsibility (accident crises), coupled with a history of similar crises and/or negative
prior relationship reputation.
6. Rebuild crisis response strategies should be used for crises with strong attributions of
crisis responsibility (preventable crises) regardless of crisis history or prior relationship
reputation.
7. The deny posture crisis response strategies should be used for rumor and challenge
crises, when possible.
8. Maintain consistency in crisis response strategies. Mixing deny crisis response strategies
with either the diminish or rebuild strategies will erode the effectiveness of the overall
response.”
Source:
Coombs, W. (2007). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and
application of situational crisis communication theory." Corporate Reputation Review:
An International Journal, 10 (3), 163-176.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 66
INTERORGANIZATIONAL NETWORKING & CRISES
“Based on some of this emerging scholarship, guidelines are taking shape for improving
interorganizational networking. Organizations that share crisis vulnerabilities because of
geographic proximity, economic or technological interdependence, common meteorological
patterns, or political linkages should take the following actions:
 Identify interorganizational networks that are relevant to potential common crises.
 Work out agreements about the purpose of these networks (domain consensus) ahead
of time.
 Facilitate interactions among the organizations and people involved in order to develop
trust and communication linkages before a crisis hits.
 Maintain continuous communication within and among the organizations in the
network.
 Require networks to gain practice in crisis handling through simulations and exercises
that involve potential transnational crises.
 Foster improvisation and problem-solving ability through these simulations and
exercises.
 Encourage team decision styles and lateral communication flows that are more
appropriate to crisis management rather than traditional bureaucratic hierarchical/
communication and control styles.
 Use interorganizational networks to make better use of the principal of concurrency —
acting quickly and collaboratively as the situation requires, then sorting out the
jurisdictional tangles later.
 Regularly arrive at mutual agreement about communication channels and fl ows and
review their adequacy.
 Encourage diverse forms of communication: informal as well as formal, external and
internal, contextual and synthetic, media driven and network driven.
 Develop ongoing relationships with key mass media players, but avoid relying solely on
the mass media as a mode of communication.
 Share knowledge of technologies among partners in the crisis-vulnerable network
without relying on technofixes to handle crises.
 Utilize different learning methods for obtaining reflection and feedback from
participating organizations in order to correct errors and adjust performance ( Comfort
1994, 1997b; Comfort and Cahill 1988; Garnett & Kouzmin 1999 ; Kiefer & Montjoy
2006).”
Source:
Garnett, J. L., & Kouzmin, A. (2007). Communicating throughout Katrina: Competing and
complementary conceptual lenses on crisis communication. Public Administration
Review, 67, 171-188. Material from p. 183
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 67
SYNTHESIS OF IMAGE MANAGEMENT/ACCOUNT STRATEGIES
STRATEGY
TACTIC EXEMPLAR
DENIAL
“We didn’t do it”
AVOIDANCE/REFUSAL
“No comment;” “We will not talk about it”
ATTRIBUTION MANAGEMENT
Excuse
“We aren’t responsible;” “We couldn’t prevent it”
Denial of intention
“We did not intend for this to happen;” ”It was an accident”
Denial of Volition/Defeasibility
“We weren’t aware this would/could happen;” “We didn’t
have enough information”
Misrepresentation
“We didn’t cause this—it only appears that way”
Blame Deflection
“We were provoked to act”
 Provocation
“We didn’t do it—they did”
 Attack
“We will sue the accuser”
 Intimidation/Accuse the
accuser
INGRATIATION
“I want to draw attention to the heroic efforts of others”
MINIMIZING
“This crisis was not that bad;” “No one was hurt”
 Minimizing impact
“With time, this crisis may end up benefitting us;” “On
 Framing
balance, there are good things and bad things about this
crisis”
“Others have experienced it worse than us”
 Differentiation
“There are other more important things we need to focus on
 Prioritization
at this time”
“The real problem is much larger than what we’ve seen thus
 Transcendence
far”
JUSTIFICATION
“We did what we were supposed to (for the right reasons);”
 Good intentions
“We had the best of intentions”
“They had it coming to them”
 Victim deserving
“Consider the good things that will come out of this”
 Bolstering
MORTIFICATION
“We apologize, and pray for your forgiveness;” “We deeply
 Repentance
regret this happened”
“We’ll compensate those affected”
 Remediation/Compensation
“This is how we’ll solve the problem;” “We’ll make things
 Rectification
right again”
SYMPATHY SOLICITATION
“We are also the victims here”
Adapted from Benoit & Coombs, in Ulmer, Sellnow & Seeger (2011) Effective crisis communication (2nd ed.),
Sage. Tables 4.1 and 4.2
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 68
AGRICULTURAL CRISIS COMMUNICATION TEMPLATE
Stakeholder
Potential Communication
Media
Employees


E-mail or newsletter
Personal contact
Retailers and
Growers/Shippers












Information packet and/or
letter
Personal contact
E-mail or e-newsletter
800 number
Web site
Advisory board meeting
Media
800 number
Phone calls
Web site
Media
Electronic communications























Conference calls
Personal meetings
Faxed statements
E-mail
Web site
Media
Conference calls
Personal meetings
E-mail
Web site
Media
Web site
800 number
Media, including social media
Initial response statement
News release
Web site
External Q&A
News conference/briefings
Advertising
Third-party groups
By-lined editorial
E-mail
Wholesalers
Industry
Associations
Regulatory
Agencies
Consumers
Media
Threshold Questions
 What do they need to know about the source of the problem?
 How is the company resolving the situation?
 What are the employees expected to do regarding the
situation?
 What do they need to know about the source of the problem?
 What actions do they need to take to resolve the situation?
 What information will they provide to their consumers,
customers and/or employees?
 Does the incident involve a wholesaler?
 Are there other companies that could have been impacted by
the wholesaler?
 Is the wholesaler prepared to communicate?
 Does the situation create uncertainty in other wholesalers’
minds about North Carolina-grown produce?
 Could the association be an ambassador for you?
 Will the association help solicit testimony from experts on the
issue?
 What actions are they taking regarding the situation?
 What are the implications of their actions?




How will consumers react?
To whom will they direct their questions?
What (mis)information have they already received?
Will the news media get information on the situation whether
you give it to them or not?
 Will the operation’s reputation be affected unless information
is aggressively released through the news media?
 Is there a broader, national industry group that can more
appropriately handle the situation?
 Can this become an industry issue rather than an individual
operation’s issue?
Source: NCState University/NCMarketReady. (2010, March). Crisis preparedness training. Raleigh, NC: North
Carolina State University. http://plantsforhumanhealth.ncsu.edu/extension/marketready/pdfsppt/NC%20MarketReady%20Crisis%20Communications%20Training%20Guide.pdf
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 69
EXEMPLAR OF AN INCIDENT COMMAND SYSTEM ORGANIZATION CHART
Source: http://www.oklahomacitynationalmemorial.org/secondary.php?section=6&catid=218&id=183
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 70
FACTORS AFFECTING THE PERCEPTION OF RISK
Defining traits of perception: Researchers on risk perception have studied the characteristics of risk that influence perception. The
conditions defined below have the greatest influence on the way risks are perceived. Source: Pan American Health
Organization; http://www.bvsde.paho.org/tutorial6/i/topic_04.html
1)
Dread: Which idea frightens you more, being eaten by a shark or dying of heart disease? Both can kill, but heart problems are much
more likely to do so. In spite of this, the most feared deaths are the ones that worry us the most. Cancer, for example, causes more
dread because it is perceived as a terrible way to die. This explains why hazards that can cause cancer, such as radiation and
chemical agents, arouse intense fears. Fear is a clear example of what we think about a risk in terms of our intuitive feelings, a
process which is called the heuristic effect.
2)
Control: Most people feel safe when they drive. Having the steering wheel in their hands produces a feeling of power, a sense of
being in control. If we change places and ride in the passenger seat, we feel nervous because we are no longer in control. When
people feel that they have some control over the process that determines the risk facing them, that risk will probably not appear so
great as in the case when they have no control over it.
3)
Is it a natural risk or a man-made one?: Nuclear energy sources, as well as mobile telephones or electric and magnetic fields, are
often a greater cause of concern than the radiation produced by the sun. However, it is a well-known fact that the sun is responsible
for a large number of skin cancers each year. The natural origin of a risk makes people perceive it as a lesser risk than a man-made
one. This factor helps to explain the widespread public concern about many technologies and products.
4)
Choice: A risk that we choose to take seems less hazardous than one imposed upon us by another person. If you use a mobile
telephone while driving, you may perceive it as hazardous that another driver uses one and you will be angry because of the risk the
other driver imposes on you, even though you are taking the same risk yourself. You are less concerned about the risk you yourself
are taking: your control over your car influences your risk perception.
5)
Effects on children: The survival of the species depends on the survival of its offspring. This explains why the risks run by children,
such as exposure to asbestos at school or the kidnapping of a young person, appear to be more serious than the same risks in adults
(exposure to asbestos in the workplace or the kidnapping of an adult).
6)
New risks: New risks, including the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Nile virus, and new technologies and products, tend
to be more alarming than those risks that we have lived with for some time and which our experience has helped us to put into
perspective.
7)
Awareness: The more aware we are of a risk, the better we perceive it and the more concerned we are. For example SARS was given
wider coverage, received more attention, and caused greater concern than influenza, which is responsible for a large number of
deaths each year. Awareness of certain risks can be high or low, depending on the attention given to them.
8)
Possibility of personal impact: Any risk can seem greater to us if we ourselves or someone close to us are the victims. This explains
why the statistical probability is often irrelevant and ineffective for communicating risks. The closer we are to the risk, and the
clearer our knowledge of its consequences, the greater will be our perception of it.
9)
Cost-benefit ratio: Some risk perception analysts and researchers believe that the cost-benefit ratio is the principal factor that
determines how much we fear a given threat. If there is a perceived benefit in a specific behavior or choice, the risk associated with
that behavior or choice will seem smaller than when no such benefit is perceived.
10) Trust: The more confidence we have in the professionals responsible for our protection or in government officials or institutions
responsible for our exposure to risk (for example, environmental officials or industrial managers) or in the people who transmit risk
information to us, the less fear we will feel. The less we trust them, the greater will be our level of concern.
11) Memory of risks: A memorable accident makes a risk easier to evoke and imagine, and therefore it can seem greater (for example,
many people remember the methyl isocyanate gas leak in Bhopal, India, that affected thousands of persons). The experiences that
people have had are an important element in their risk perception. A person’s experience will determine whether he or she attaches
greater importance to one particular risk than to other statistically significant ones.
12) Spread over space and time: Unusual events such as nuclear accidents are perceived as riskier than commonplace risks (collisions on
the highway).
13) Effects on personal safety and personal properties: An event is perceived as risky when it affects basic interests and values; for
example, health, housing, the value of property, and the future.
14) Fairness: People who have to face greater risks than others and who do not have access to benefits normally become indignant. The
community believes that there should be a fair distribution of benefits and of risks.
15) Process: The agency or government must demonstrate trustworthiness, honesty and concern about impacts on the community. In
addition, it needs to communicate with the population before making decisions, and establish a relationship of mutual respect. It
should also listen to the people, and respond to any doubts or questioning on their part. When these conditions are not met, the
perception of the risk in question is negatively affected.
COMM 426 (S12): Health Risk & Crisis Comm—p. 71
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION GRID
https://www.dshs.state.tx.us/riskcomm/tools.shtm
First
Communication
Pre-Event
Communication
Basic information about threats
Instructions on emergency call procedures
Overview of threat response plan
Plan for early preventative treatment for key staff
Orientation to emergency clinic operations
Basic description of threat
How/where did the threat emerge?
Who has been (will be) exposed to the threat?
What’s being done to protect the general public?
What people need to do to protect themselves.
Instructions to first responders
Secondary
Communication
Specific information about threat: contagiousness,
diffusion patterns/vectors, symptoms/etiology,
lethality, diagnostic issues, etc.
Emergency clinic locations/hours
What information re: mass treatment centers or
opportunities
Description of any available
preventative/inoculation treatments
Special population (e.g., homebound)
considerations
Who/where to call if you have/suspect a case
How to make a definitive diagnosis
Is isolation required?
Follow-up
Communication
What needs are there for quarantine?
Updates on clinics, operations, progress, changes
and developments, etc.
What to expect after treatment
How to know when it’s safe to resume daily
activities
Adverse effects mitigation
When to see physician, government representative,
etc.
What is being done to improve response to and/or
prevent the next occurrence
Local Gov’t
School Districts
IC Group
Designated PoC
Funeral Directors
Police/Fire/ EMTs
Designated PoC
Fax
Home Care
Agencies
Fax
Phone Tree/
Health Dept Staff
Emergency Staff Mtg
Volunteer
Designated PoC
Organizations
Nursing Homes
Fax
Fax: 2nd priority
Hospitals
Designated PoC
Primary Care
Physicians
All Other
Physicians
Media, TV,
Newspapers
Press Releases &
Briefings
MEDIA/COMM. CHANNEL
Fax: 1st priority
General Public
STAKEHOLDER/PUBLIC
Media
Submitted by Grayson County Health Dept., TX