Читать книгу Communicating in Risk, Crisis, and High Stress Situations: Evidence-Based Strategies and Practice - Vincent T. Covello - Страница 82

Phase 2 covered the period from approximately the mid‐1980s to the mid‐1990s. Researchers and decision‐makers focused on the characteristics of effective risk and crisis communication, such as anticipating, planning, practice, trust, message clarity, risk perceptions, the effective use of delivery channels, and listening to the needs of those interested and affected. Leiss’s Phase 2 corresponds to Fischhoff’s Stages 3‐6.

Phase 2 also marked the introduction of the term risk communication into the research literature. The first use of the term risk communication describing a formal discipline of scientific inquiry appeared with publications by Covello, the Conservation Foundation, and the National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences (NRC/NAS).⁶ Th NRC/NAS report was one of the first documents identifying risk communication as a science.

Many techniques for effective risk communication came from research conducted in Phase 2. However, researchers also uncovered challenges and defects. One of the most important defects was failing to recognize the importance of stakeholder engagement. Another was the adoption, often without reflection, by risk communicators and managers of persuasive communication techniques developed by consumer marketers. Using such techniques raises moral questions, especially when these techniques are used to manipulate emotions or hide facts.