The Human Layer
Population Psychology
Related to Disaster
Preparedness and
Response
Overview




Identify who we are talking about
Select Psychological Issues and Place Them on the
Project’s Disaster Timeline
Explore the Nature of the Selected Psychological Issues
Link Psychological issues to the Physical Layer and the
Overall Model: Using Our Simulation
We are Talking About
Population-Related Issues



Large-scale psychological issues
Those “victimized” by the disaster
Varying in

Vulnerability
• Access to disaster support and services
• Beliefs regarding consequences and probability

Psychological characteristics
For Later Consideration

First Responders
Health care professionals
 Police
 Firefighters
 Community workers
 Volunteers

Some Psychological Issues
Coping with serious illness as an analogy
 Analytical Focal Points


Key psychological factors that correlate with
coping and outcome that
• Can be operationalized
• Can be quantified?
Psychological Factors:
Analytical Focal Points as a Function of Time
Psychological Factors:
Analytical Focal Points as a Function of Time
Beliefs about:
• Severity of consequences
• Vulnerability
• Efficacy of responses
Psychological Factors:
Analytical Focal Points as a Function of Time
Beliefs about:
• Severity of consequences
• Vulnerability
• Efficacy of responses
The nature of the disaster re amount of warning
• earthquake
• hurricane
• tsunami
• “man-made”
Psychological Factors:
Analytical Focal Points as a Function of Time
Beliefs about:
First responders
• Severity of consequences
Evacuation
• Vulnerability
• Efficacy of responses
The nature of the disaster re amount of warning
• earthquake
• hurricane
• tsunami
• “man-made”
Psychological Factors:
Analytical Focal Points as a Function of Time
Beliefs about:
First responders
• Severity of consequences
Evacuation
• Vulnerability
• Efficacy of responses
The nature of the disaster re amount of warning
• earthquake
• hurricane
• tsunami
Post-trauma stress (PTSD)
• “man-made”
Place Identity
Analysis and Planning under
Normal Conditions

Beliefs about vulnerability
Beliefs about severity of consequences
 Beliefs about probability


Beliefs about efficacy of response
Beliefs about
Severity of Consequences

Can inform the degree to which the
community is prepared
physically
 psychologically

Beliefs about
Severity of Consequences

Can affect the degree to which the
community is prepared
physically
 psychologically

Bidirectional
Beliefs about
Severity of Probability
In a study of Vancouver, Victoria, LA, and
Anchorage residents beliefs about
severity of probability was measured
 Unrealistic optimism

A threat exists for others but not for me
 Unrealistic optimism and perceived control


The problem of “imaginability”
Perceived Vulnerability


“Imaginability”
“…it is necessary to examine the assumptions of everyday life and the
effects of having these assumptions shattered” (Brown & Neal, 2001)
Beliefs about Efficacy of Response

Coping self-efficacy is the strongest predictor of
disaster-related distress

More than
•
•
•
•


lost resources
social support
optimism
gender and other demographic variables
Changes with time as new information and experience
are acquired
Linked with vulnerability and experience
Collective Efficacy

The “shared belief that a group can effectively
meet environmental demands and improve their
lives through concerted effort” (Benight, 2004)

Communitas – the momentary upsurge in collective
unity and spirit associated with certain ritual events
and social crises
Collective Efficacy
Perceived Collective Efficacy Over Time
100
Communitas
PCE
80
60
40
20
0
Normal
Alert
Emergency
Tim e
Recovery
Why Collective Efficacy is Important
CE influences




resource management,
strategic planning,
perseverance, vulnerability
Predicted by




lost resources
perceptions of social support
psychological distress
Vulnerable Populations and Social
Geography

Vulnerable populations often experience a lack of relief
services due to:





More vulnerable infrastructure
Smaller number of organizations with fewer connections
Geographic barriers slowing redistribution of resources
Leading to a decrease in CE and thus an increase in
psychological distress
Therefore, perception of collective efficacy is mediated
by interventions that enhance resources and social
support
Distribution of Disaster Social Services
Organizations and Vulnerable Populations
Links Among Disaster
Services Organizations
Vulnerable Populations Loop
Disaster Response
Social Geography
Perceived Collective
Efficacy
• Access to Resources
• Perceived Social
Support
• Infrastructure Resilience
• Social Support
(Organization Relief)
• Resource Loss
• Psychological Distress
Organization
Network and
Capacity
Number of
Organizations
Ability to Mitigate
Disaster
Psychological issues linked to the physical layer:
Using our Simulator

Simulator effectiveness relies on its ability to identify:




Infrastructure weaknesses and interdependencies
Relief weaknesses and interdependencies
Resource allocation
because these issues predict collective efficacy across
social geography they support human capacity to cope
and act during disaster.
Vulnerable Populations Loop
Disaster Response
Social Geography
Perceived Collective
Efficacy
• Access to Resources
• Perceived Social
Support
• Infrastructure Resilience
• Social Support
(Organization Relief)
• Resource Loss
• Psychological Distress
Organization
Network and
Capacity
Number of
Organizations
The Simulator works here
Ability to Mitigate
Disaster
The Psychology of Evacuation
Predictors of Behaviour During Evacuation


Panic
Social Affiliation
Panic Defined

Fear that is






Intense
Inappropriate and/or
Excessive
Often accompanied by flight
More likely with unexpected events or events of
unexpected magnitude
Often viewed as an “overestimated response” (Mawson,
2005)

Ineffective behaviour is the result
Conceptions of Panic
Classic conception: Panic = perceived
imminent danger + limited escape options
 Newer conception: location of attachment
figures more important than escape
options

Panic and Affiliation:
A Social Attachment Model
Affiliation Present
Threat Low
Threat High
Affiliation Absent
Panic and Affiliation:
A Social Attachment Model
Affiliation Present
Threat Low
Threat High
•Increased attachment
Affiliation Absent
Panic and Affiliation:
A Social Attachment Model
Affiliation Present
Threat Low
Threat High
•Increased attachment
Affiliation Absent
•Low intensity avoidance of
threat
Panic and Affiliation:
A Social Attachment Model
Affiliation Present
Threat Low
Threat High
•Increased attachment
•Increased attachment
•Orderly flight/evacuation
•Occasional panic
Affiliation Absent
•Low intensity avoidance of
threat
Panic and Affiliation:
A Social Attachment Model
Affiliation Present
Threat Low
Threat High
•Increased attachment
•Increased attachment
•Orderly flight/evacuation
•Occasional panic
Affiliation Absent
•Low intensity avoidance of
threat
•Mass panic
Panic and Affiliation:
A Social Attachment Model
Affiliation Present
Threat Low
Threat High
•Increased attachment
•Increased attachment
•Orderly flight/evacuation
•Occasional panic
Affiliation Absent
•Low intensity avoidance of
threat
•Mass panic — toward the
familiar, not always away
from danger
Evacuation
Panic as a Social Phenomenon


Elevated by a lack of familiarity with place —
exacerbating contagion
Reduced by support — given and received

If you can’t find loved ones, find someone
• Called the “convergence effect”
• To help others
• Evidence of being alive and unaffected
• Social comparison