Warnings social media rev 3

SOCIAL MEDIA ANDPUBLIC WARNINGS

DENVER UASI CONFERENCE ON SHARED STRATEGIESFOR HOMELAND SECURITY

DENVER, COLORADO: DECEMBER 15, 2010

1

Dennis S. Mileti, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus

University of Colorado at BoulderDennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

BACKGROUND

Psychology + Sociology Departments On Campuses For 100 Years: Pretty much have human beings figured out

50 Years Public Warnings Research: Solid evidence (350+ scientific publications)

But A Gap Exists: Between research evidence & practice

Warnings = “Applied Social Science”: Because they try to influence public behavior

2Dennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

BASIC QUESTION

How Do You Help People In Danger STOP…. HEAR….TAKE Protective Actions….

Such As: Vehicle evacuation Pedestrian and/or occupant evacuation Sheltering in place Breathing protection And more


FIRST THINGS FIRST

Regarding Public Protective Action-Taking In Response To Warnings: Human beings are “HARD WIRED” in a

particular way

Two Wires You Should Know About: Before we consider substantive topics


WIRE ONE

Reality For Humans = What People “Think”

People “Think” They’re Safe: Perceive personal safety NOT personal risk

Prime Public Warning Challenge: “Warnings must help people at risk overcome

their natural belief to think they’re safe versus try to guide people to take protective actions that are inconsistent with their perceptions of safety” 5Dennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

WIRE TWO

Shifting Perceptions (from safety to risk) After Receiving Warning Takes Time

Happens Through Social Interaction: 1. SEEKING: confirming warning information 2. HEARING: the warning multiple times 3. MILLING: talking it over with others

None Of This Will Ever Change: It’s basic to being human & it’s the way

people are


PUBLIC WARNINGS

“Work best when they take these basic elements

of the human character into account vs. ignore

them (no matter what you believe or technology

you use)”


WILL COVER

Four Topics: 1. Warning system design & preparedness 2. Public alerting 3. Warning messages 4. Public response processes

And Some Sub-topics: Knowledge: what’s known in the social

sciences Myths: what we know isn’t real Social media: applications & issue


WARNING SYSTEM DESIGN


ANY WARNING SYSTEM

Weaves Together: Elements:

Technology, authorities & the grass roots Disciplines:

Physical, social & behavioral sciences & IT Specializations:

Inter-organizational relations, systems analysis, human factors & social psychology, PIOs

Societal divisions: Varied government jurisdictions, public & private

sectors, organizations & the public Goal:

Rarely used “highly reliable” complex systems10Dennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

WARNING SYSTEM ELEMENTS

Subsystems And Actors: Monitoring: natural, technological, civil

environments Detection: scientists, law enforcement Management: politicians, emergency

managers Public response: general public, specialized

sub-populations (racial/ethnic groups, tribes, special facilities)

Linkages Between Them: Observation, communication, interpretation

While Public Is Also Warning Itself11Dennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

COMPLEX SYSTEMS HAVE FAILURES

Design “Complete” Warning System: Subsystems specified Linkages operational Subsystems & linkages integrated Exogenous factors incorporated in the system

Ensure Subsystems & Linkages Work: Appropriate technology Sound system actor behavior

PLANNING, TRAINING, EXERCISES ARE NEEDED 12Dennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

SPECIALIZED SOCIALMEDIA APPLICATIONS

(TO DESIGN “OFFICIAL WARNING SYSTEMS”)

Integrate Official Subsystems & Players To Avoid System Failures: To create reliable warning systems among

warning system agencies & actors All subsystems & linkages present:

All actors are talking to each other All subsystems, linkages, & exogenous factors

integrated into the system Linkages don’t break when used


WHAT SOCIAL MEDIA COULD CONTRIBUTE TO SYSTEM DESIGN

Warning System Preparedness: Dedicated: Social media system for EM Elaborate: all warning systems elements Integrate: subsystems, linkages, and

exogenous factors into one system Major Goals:

Rarely used system will work when needed Weave together agencies & disciplines from

different silos that rarely interact Communication links don’t break when used


ALERTING THE PUBLIC


ALERTING

• STOP ongoing life

• Get people’s ATTENTION

• CAPTURE your audience first, then deliver public warning messages


FORMAL ALERTING

Get people’s attention, e.g., Piercing sounds with TV crawlers

Wake people up, e.g., Sleeping children, older adults, under the

influence Outside devices loose effectiveness

if: Windows shut & air/heat is on 3 minute sounding 10 decibels over ambient

outdoor siren has a 62% chance of waking someone

up Need indoor devices for alert at

night: Fast moving community event Fire in a hotel


INFORMAL ALERTING

Warning Diffusion “Among Those Warned” Always happens, count on it, & use it

9/11 Example: Most in country learned about attack in 1 hour Many in towers found out a plane hit from

friends/relatives

Rule Of Thumb: 1st warning received: 1 informal for every 2

formal Rising with social media


MYTH: INFORMATION CANBE CONTROLLED

Myth: Those with formal warning system roles can

control public warning information

Reality: They never could….and still can’t

There’s always been informal alerting & Informal alerting is rising via social media


SOCIAL MEDIA CAN HELP ALERT THE PUBLIC

Social Media May Be New But What It Facilitates For Alerting Isn’t: Informal alerting has always been part of

public warnings

Social Media Has Potential To: Accelerate alerting the public Reach hard to reach sub-populations Direct people to complete warning information


WARNING MESSAGES


WARNING MESSAGES& PUBLIC RESPONSE

How Public Responds To Warnings And Factors That Influence Response: Studied by social scientists over the last half-

century 100’s of publications exist

Much Known About How Messages & Other Factors Influence Public Response: Here’s what 50+ years of research says….. 22Dennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

MYTH: PANIC

Non-problem: Never occurred after a warning

Actual Problem: We didn’t issue a warning so we wouldn’t

cause a panic” Panic Occurs When:

Spaces are confined Escape routes ARE available, but People think: not enough time for everyone to

use them, resulting in People must: “compete to live”

Even Then, Panic Is Rare


CONCLUSIONS FROM THE RESEARCH: What Matters Most

All Factors Aren’t Equal

Some Factors Are REALLY Important: CONTENT: what the message says:

Especially what actions to take REPETITION: hearing same warning many times CUES: seeing things that confirm the message MILLING: confirming it with others

Other Factors Are LESS Important, e.g., Demographics (unless information is poor)


AN OBSERVATION FROM ACROSS ALL THE STUDIES

Message Factors: Largest impact of all on public response

If “High Quality” Message Factors: Influence of other factors decrease Ability to manage public response can be high Example: Nanticoke

If “Low Quality” Message Factors: Influence of other factors “increases” Ability to manage public response can be lost Example: Three Mile Island


SUMMARY OF AN “EVIDENCE BASED” WARNING

MESSAGE IS: 1. CLEAR (simply worded) 2. SPECIFIC (precise and non-ambiguous) 3. ACCURATE (no error) 4. CERTAIN (authoritative and confident) 5. CONSISTENT (within and between messages)

ABOUT: 6. WHAT (what to do) 7. WHEN (when to do it) 8. WHERE (who should & shouldn’t do it) 9. WHY (hazard & consequences) 10. WHO (who’s giving the message)

AND IS CONFIRMED: 11. REPEATED frequently 12. over MULTIPLE COMMUNICTION CHANNELS


MYTH: “KISS”

Definition: “Keep it short/simple stupid”

Myth: Applies to public warnings

Reality: Applies to advertising, not warnings Warned people become “information starved” If warnings don’t say enough, they’ll find what

they want to know someplace else & confusion results


MYTH: CRY WOLF

Myth: People don’t respond after false alarms

Reality: They do (perhaps differently)

False alarms: Can be productive for future response “if

explained” REAL ISSUE: their cost angers local government

Exception: People ignore sirens

Especially if sounded frequently, e.g., for siren tests28Dennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

MYTH: SOCIAL MEDIAWARNINGS ARE WRONG

Myth: The warnings the public gives to itself are

wrong and of lower quality than official warnings

Reality: The warnings the public gives to itself are

accurate and self-correcting when they are not


SOCIAL MEDIA HOLDS PROMISE

Social Media Have Potential To Build On What’s Been Learned In Social Sciences: To push the critical public warning response

buttons and help generate sound public response

The Critical “Buttons”: CONTENT: what the message says:

Especially what actions to take REPETITION: hearing same warning many

times CUES: seeing things that confirm the

message MILLING: confirming it with others


BUTTON 1: MILLING

PUBLIC ACTION-TAKING: Social media is milling, can facilitate it, and therefore reduce the time spent before taking protective actions if we can provide the key elements of milling

SURVEILLANCE: How the public is responding and what they think can be easily assessed and used to repackage subsequent warning messages by official warning providers 31Dennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

BUTTON 2: REPITITION

PUBLIC ACTION TAKING: Social media fosters repetitive messaging thereby enhancing public protective action taking if designed to exceed “tipping points” on repetitive message curves

OFFICIAL WARNING PROVIDERS: Strategic placement of key warning information in social media to be repeated (repeat broadcasters are the most believed)


BUTTON 3: CUES

PUBLIC ACTION TAKING: Social media can post appropriate cues (the things that motivate others) for people to see and foster the protective actions of others

OFFCIAL WARNING PROVIDERS: Strategic placement of protective action-taking, the hazard & more to grow sound public response


BUTTON 4: CONTENT

PUBLIC ACTION TAKING: Social media provides first hand information content and self-corrects

OFFICIAL WARNING PROVIDERS: Social media can be used to effectively point people elsewhere to find complete warning messages (informed by the research record) & correct wrong message content


PUBLIC RESPONSE PROCESSES EXAMPLES


DIFFUSION

Diffusion = Getting The Warning Out: A social process regardless of technology used S-shaped diffusion curves

No “SILVER BULLET” Technology: Different technologies = different effectiveness USE ALL OF THEM (relying on one won’t work) Reach sub-populations in different ways:

Using diverse technologies (channels) helps “confirm” the message which facilitates human response

Effectiveness impacted by time of day/night Social media is not THE answer, it’s ANOTHER

answer among many to shorten diffusion time


MOBILIZATION

Time Between First Warning Received & Starting A Protective Action: People don’t all act at once Getting ready delays response S-shaped mobilization curves

People Delay To: Locate family & gather possessions Confirm warning & need to take action Talk it over with others

A Few People Don’t Respond At All37Dennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

COMPLIANCE

Will The Public Do What You Recommend?

Influenced By Information During The Event: MESSAGE QUALITY & QUANTITY “Public compliance is more the result of the quality &

quantity of messages they’re provided during an event than anything else”

Observed To Be: High in some events, low in other events, and in the

middle in others Social media holds potential to increase appropriate

public action-taking by through enhanced diffusion38Dennis S. Mileti (December 2010)

CONCLUSIONS

Social Media Is Here To Stay: And providing effective public warning

information will NEVER be the same

Key Questions Should Be Asked and Answered & These Include…..


1. WARNING SYSTEM DESIGN

How Can Social Media Be Used To Build A New Model To: Re-design and grow official public warning and

information systems that: Better integrate inter-organizational actors Enhance sub-system linkages Reduce the causes of system failures?


2. CORRECTIVE TARGETTEDPUBLIC MESSAGING

How Can Social Media Be Used To: Better monitor and assess public thoughts,

actions & inactions during a public warning event

To facilitate better ways to issue subsequent official public warning messages based on what people actually are and aren’t doing


3. ACCELERATED PUBLIC ALERTING

How Can Social Media Be Used To: Help shorten the time it takes to alert the

public Reach hard-to-reach sub-populations Facilitate people’s natural inclination to

provide informal notification to people they know

Steer people to official and complete warning messages and information


4. ENHANCED PUBLIC PROTECTIVE ACTION-TAKING

How Can Social Media Be Used To Upgrade How Official Warning Messages Provide: Enhanced use of key factors found to motivate

public protective action-taking including: Message content Repetition Observation of response cues Milling


5. PHASE-IN

Some Subpopulations Use Social Media & Audience Share Will Grow: What’s the most appropriate social media

phase-in for public alerting and warning message delivery

And Social Media Is Rapidly Changing: How can rapid change in the technology and

how it is used be accommodated


MY VIEW OF SOCIAL MEDIA & PUBLIC WARNING

“Social media isn’t a problem for public warnings, its a solution to many of the problems that have plagued public warnings for decades, but reaping those benefits requires a shift in the thinking”


A FINAL WORD

Warning Practices in America: Don’t use much of what’s been learned about

warnings into account Without steps to seize social media warning

opportunities, the nation will fall even further behind


QUESTIONS?

[email protected]

303-520-3400


Documents

Warnings social media rev 3