Journal Articles
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915
Browse
12 results
Search Results
Item Communicating natural hazards science advice: Understanding scientists', decision-makers’, and the public's perceptions of the scientific process(Elsevier B.V., 2025-10-01) Doyle EEH; Thompson J; Hill SR; Williams M; Paton D; Harrison SE; Bostrom A; Becker JSHow individuals perceive scientific processes impacts their interpretation of, trust in, and use of, science advice particularly when managing uncertain natural hazard risk. We explored a) how diverse stakeholders understand how science of natural hazards is produced, and b) how this relates to their ontological, epistemological, and philosophical views of science. Using inductive analysis of semi-structured interviews with 31 participants involved in the management of natural hazards in Aotearoa New Zealand (including non-scientists), we produced three leading themes describing their views: 1) ‘Science is a way of seeing the world’; 2) ‘Science has limitations’; and 3) ‘Knowledge evolves’. Across Scientist, non-Scientist, and Lay public groups, there was broad agreement on the fundamental steps of the scientific process, aligning mostly with a hypothetico-deductive process. However, many discussed how others may have different perspectives of scientific approaches, truth, and reality. These are informed by training, disciplinary biases, cultural practices, and personal experience of hazards and associated science. We propose that individuals who recognise different worldviews and philosophies of science will experience higher levels of communication and cognitive uncertainty, which encourages information seeking behaviour and can improve communication efficacy, particularly during high pressure events. We conclude with three communication lessons: 1) be transparent about the processes and causes of change in natural hazards science advice; 2) communicate as both trusted individuals as well as through collective Science Advisory Group (SAG) systems; and 3) provide accessible structures and language to help lay people articulate scientific processes they often intuitively understand, rather than just simplifying information.Item Transformative approaches to disaster risk reduction: Social, societal, and environmental contributions to post-disaster capacity building(Massey University, 2024-12) Paton D; Buergelt PT; Becker JS; Doyle EEH; Jang L-J; Johnston DM; Tedim FThis paper discusses whether Community Engagement Theory (CET) could be augmented in ways that afford opportunities to develop a framework for understanding how emergent change and transformative learning can occur in disaster response and recovery settings. The foundation for doing so derives from appreciating that CET describes process theory that comprises variables representing adaptive capacities. That is, the presence of these capacities enables people to adapt to any set of circumstances, particularly when people are called upon to make decisions and to act during conditions of uncertainty. This approach builds on the potential for variables such as community participation, collective efficacy, and empowerment to provide a social context for people to formulate and enact strategies to support their recovery and to be able to do so when interacting with government, non-government, and business entities. However, based on a critical comparative analysis of relevant research into post-disaster emergent and transformational shifts in community capacity, it is argued that the above variables need to be augmented. The paper discusses the rationale for including factors such as community leadership, governance, place attachment, and city identity in an augmented conceptual transdisciplinary transformative learning Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) model. The function of this model is consistent with the Sendai Framework for DRR Priority 4, Building Back Better goal.Item A decade of shaking in the Garden City: the dynamics of preparedness, perceptions, and beliefs in Canterbury, New Zealand, and implications for earthquake information(Frontiers Media S.A., 2024-11-11) Becker JS; Vinnell LJ; Doyle EEH; McBride SK; Paton D; Johnston DM; Fallou LIntroduction: This study explored earthquake preparedness over time—before, during, and 10 years after the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES) in New Zealand (NZ; known as Aotearoa in te ao Māori). Method: Surveys of Canterbury residents were conducted in 2009, 2013, and 2021, using variables derived from Community Engagement Theory (CET). The surveys measured earthquake perceptions and beliefs, participation and engagement, and preparedness actions. Results were compared across the three samples. Results: Findings indicate that perceptions and beliefs (e.g., risk perception, outcome expectancy beliefs), and types of preparedness actions taken (e.g., collection of survival items, structural preparedness, community and/or agency relationships), differed over time, depending on people's experiences before, during, and after the CES. For example, during and after the CES, people were more likely to believe that preparing provided a benefit to daily life, but less likely to think it could reduce property damage, perhaps due to people's experiences of disruption and damage during the earthquakes. Discussion: An understanding of such dynamics can assist with the provision and timing of risk and preparedness information. This study highlights the importance of providing applicable and actionable preparedness information, that is relevant to people's experiences, throughout an earthquake sequence. Such information might evolve and change in focus over time depending on risks and needs. Focus could also be given to information that builds peoples beliefs and capacities to undertake preparedness in evolving situations. Understanding preparedness in the context of different experiences and timeframes is useful in helping update models such as the CET, where the dynamics of time might be better incorporated.Item Differences in perceived sources of uncertainty in natural hazards science advice: lessons for cross-disciplinary communication(Frontiers Media S.A., 2024-04-04) Doyle EEH; Thompson J; Hill SR; Williams M; Paton D; Harrison SE; Bostrom A; Becker JS; Tagliacozzo SIntroduction: We conducted mental model interviews in Aotearoa NZ to understand perspectives of uncertainty associated with natural hazards science. Such science contains many layers of interacting uncertainties, and varied understandings about what these are and where they come from creates communication challenges, impacting the trust in, and use of, science. To improve effective communication, it is thus crucial to understand the many diverse perspectives of scientific uncertainty. Methods: Participants included hazard scientists (n = 11, e.g., geophysical, social, and other sciences), professionals with some scientific training (n = 10, e.g., planners, policy analysts, emergency managers), and lay public participants with no advanced training in science (n = 10, e.g., journalism, history, administration, art, or other domains). We present a comparative analysis of the mental model maps produced by participants, considering individuals’ levels of training and expertise in, and experience of, science. Results: A qualitative comparison identified increasing map organization with science literacy, suggesting greater science training in, experience with, or expertise in, science results in a more organized and structured mental model of uncertainty. There were also language differences, with lay public participants focused more on perceptions of control and safety, while scientists focused on formal models of risk and likelihood. Discussion: These findings are presented to enhance hazard, risk, and science communication. It is important to also identify ways to understand the tacit knowledge individuals already hold which may influence their interpretation of a message. The interview methodology we present here could also be adapted to understand different perspectives in participatory and co-development research.Item Where does scientific uncertainty come from, and from whom? Mapping perspectives of natural hazards science advice(Elsevier, 2023-10-01) Doyle EEH; Thompson J; Hill S; Williams M; Paton D; Harrison S; Bostrom A; Becker JThe science associated with assessing natural hazard phenomena and the risks they pose contains many layers of complex and interacting elements, resulting in diverse sources of uncertainty. This creates a challenge for effective communication, which must consider how people perceive that uncertainty. Thus, we conducted twenty-five mental model interviews in Aotearoa New Zealand with participants ranging from scientists to policy writers and emergency managers, and through to the public. The interviews included three phases: an initial elicitation of free thoughts about uncertainty, a mental model mapping activity, and a semi-structured interview protocol to explore further questions about scientific processes and their personal philosophy of science. Qualitative analysis led to the construction of key themes, including: (a) understanding that, in addition to data sources, the ‘actors’ involved can also be sources of uncertainty; (b) acknowledging that factors such as governance and funding decisions partly determine uncertainty; (c) the influence of assumptions about expected human behaviours contributing to “known unknowns'; and (d) the difficulty of defining what uncertainty actually is. Participants additionally highlighted the positive role of uncertainty for promoting debate and as a catalyst for further inquiry. They also demonstrated a level of comfort with uncertainty and advocated for ‘sitting with uncertainty’ for transparent reporting in advice. Additional influences included: an individual's understanding of societal factors; the role of emotions; using outcomes as a scaffold for interpretation; and the complex and noisy communications landscape. Each of these require further investigation to enhance the communication of scientific uncertainty.Item Eliciting mental models of science and risk for disaster communication: A scoping review of methodologies(Elsevier Ltd, 2022-07-01) Doyle EEH; Harrison SE; Hill SR; Williams M; Paton D; Bostrom AWe present a scoping review of methods used to elicit individuals' mental models of science or risk. Developing a shared understanding of the science related to risk is crucial for diverse individuals to collaboratively manage disaster consequences. Mental models, or people's psychological representation of how the ‘world works’, present a valuable tool to achieve this. Potential applications range from developing effective risk communication for use in short-warning situations to community co-development of future communication protocols for the co-management of risk. A diverse range of tools, in diverse fields, have thus been developed to elicit these mental models. Forty-four articles were selected via inclusion criteria from 561 found through a systematic search. We identified a wide range of direct and indirect elicitation techniques (concept, cognitive, flow, information world, knowledge, mind, and fuzzy cognitive maps, and decision influence diagrams) and interview-based techniques. Many used multiple elicitation techniques such as free-drawing, interviews, free-listing, sorting tasks, attitudinal surveys, photograph elicitation, metaphor analysis, and mapping software. We identify several challenges when designing elicitation methods, including researcher influence, the importance of external visualization, a lack of evaluation, the role of ‘experts’, and ethical considerations due to the influence of the process itself. We present a preliminary typology for elicitation and analysis and suggest future research should explore methods to assess the evolution of mental models to understand how conceptualisations change through time, experience, or public education programs. These lessons have the potential to benefit both science and disaster risk communication activities, given best practice calls for mutually constructed understanding.Item Tsunami awareness and preparedness in Aotearoa New Zealand: The evolution of community understanding(Elsevier Ltd, 2021-11-01) Dhellemmes A; Leonard GS; Johnston DM; Vinnell LJ; Becker JS; Fraser SA; Paton DAfter catastrophic events such as the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami there is a clear need for vulnerable countries like Aotearoa New Zealand to get prepared for tsunami. In the last ten years, the New Zealand government initiated major efforts to raise awareness of tsunami risk among coastal residents. This study explores tsunami awareness, preparedness, and evacuation intentions among residents of the East Coast of the North Island in a 2015 survey. The ten chosen locations also participated in a tsunami survey in 2003, with results demonstrating that tsunami awareness rose in the twelve years between the surveys. The 2015 survey also included questions on preparedness and intended action. Even though coastal residents know they live in a tsunami prone area, preparedness is relatively low and high expectations of a formal warning remain, even for a local source tsunami scenario. Furthermore, survey respondents had unrealistic ideas of evacuation procedures. When asked about their evacuation intentions, respondents intended to undertake a number of different actions before evacuating their homes, which could cause significant delays in the evacuation process. Most respondents were also reluctant to evacuate on foot and prefer using their vehicles instead, which could create dangerous traffic congestion. These surveyed intentions are consistent with a study of actual evacuation behaviours in the subsequent 2016 Kaikōura earthquake and tsunami, providing validation for the survey indicators. This paper identifies the procedures least understood by the public and offers some solutions to improve tsunami preparedness.Item Psychosocial recovery from disasters: A framework informed by evidence(The New Zealand Psychological Society, 2011) Mooney MF; Paton D; de Terte I; Johal S; Karanci AN; Gardner D; Collins S; Glavovic B; Huggins TJ; Johnston L; Chambers R; Johnston D; Fitzgerald, J; O'Connor, F; Evans, IMFollowing the Canterbury earthquakes, The Joint Centre for Disaster Research (JCDR), a Massey University and Geological and Nuclear Science (GNS Science) collaboration, formed a Psychosocial Recovery Advisory Group to help support organisations involved in the recovery process. This advisory group reviews and summarises evidence-based research findings for those who make requests for such information. Extensive experience within the group adds a practitioner perspective to this advice. This article discusses the definition of psychosocial recovery used by the group to date, and the group’s view that psychosocial recovery involves easing psychological difficulties for individuals, families/whānau and communities, as well as building and bolstering social and psychological well-being. The authors draw on a brief discussion of this literature to make practical suggestions for psychosocial recovery.Item The communication of uncertain scientific advice during natural hazard events(The New Zealand Psychological Society, 2011) Hudson-Doyle EE; Johnston DM; McClure J; Paton DDuring natural hazard crises such as earthquakes, tsunami, and volcanic eruptions, a number of critical challenges arise in emergency management decision-making. A multidisciplinary approach bridging psychology and natural hazard sciences has the potential to enhance the quality of these decisions. Psychological research into the public understanding of different phrasings of probability has identified that the framing, directionality and probabilistic format can influence people’s understanding, affecting their action choices. We present results identifying that translations of verbal to numerical probability phrases differ between scientists and non-scientists, and that translation tables such as those used for the International Panel on Climate Change reports should be developed for natural hazards. In addition we present a preliminary result illustrating that individuals may ‘shift’ the likelihood of an event towards the end of a time window.Item When the earth doesn't stop shaking: How experiences over time influenced information needs, communication, and interpretation of aftershock information during the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence, New Zealand(Elsevier, 1/03/2019) Becker JS; Potter SH; McBride SK; Wein A; Doyle EEH; Paton D© 2018 The Authors The Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES) began with the Darfield earthquake on 4 September 2010. Continual large and small aftershocks since that time have meant communities have cycled through repeated periods of impact, response and recovery. Scientific communication about aftershocks during such a prolonged sequence has faced distinct challenges. We conducted research to better understand aftershock information needs for agencies and the public, and how people interpreted and responded to such information. We found that a wide range of information was needed from basic facts about aftershocks through to more technical information, and in different formats (e.g. maps, tables, graphs, text, analogies). Information needs also evolved throughout the sequence, and differed depending on people's roles and experiences, and the phase of impact, response and recovery communities were in. Interpretation of aftershock information was influenced by a variety of factors including how understandable and relevant the information was, whether people had prior knowledge or experience of aftershocks, whether the information was personalised or contextualised, emotions and feelings, credibility and trust, and external influences. Given that such a diversity of evolving information is required, it is imperative that geoscientists strategize how to provide such information before a significant earthquake occurs.
