Abstract
Communications between experts and the public are often fraught with misunderstandings and approached with trepidation by both groups. This chapter aims to improve these communications by providing readers with a better understanding of who the “public” and “experts” are, the unavoidable differences between experts and the public that can lead to misunderstandings and friction, and suggestions for bridging the public–expert gap.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bond M (2009) Decision-making: Risk school. Nature 461:1189–1192
Bureau of Land Use Management, California (2008) Public Meeting Image BL031113OR. http://www.blm.gov. Accessed 18 April 2010
Burger J, Mayer HJ, Greenberg M, Powers C, Volz CD, Gochfeld M (2006) Conceptual site models as a tool in evaluating ecological health: The case of the department of energy’s amchitka island nuclear test site. J Toxicol Environ Health: Part A 69:1217–1238
Conservation West (2009) State Budget Cuts Threaten Protections for Washington’s Environment, http://www.pugetsound.org/news/news-about-people-for-puget-sound/033009cuts/. Accessed 7 August 2009
Covello VT (1993) Risk communication and occupational medicine. J Occup Med 35:18–19
Covello VT, Minamyer S, Kathy C (2007) Effective risk and crisis communication during water security emergencies-summary report of EPA sponsored message mapping workshops. EPA/600/R-07/027:US EPA
Covello VT, Peters RG, Wojtecki JG, Hyde RC (2001) Risk communication, the west nile virus epidemic: Responding to the communication challenges posed by the intentional and unintentional release of a pathogen in an urban setting. J. Urban Health: Bull. N. Y. Acad. Med. 78:382
Department of Energy (DOE) (1996) Sun Tracking Heliostats at Solar Two, Daggett, California Near Barstow. http://www.doedigitalarchive.doe.gov/ImageDetailView.cfm?ImageID=1000361&page=search&pageid=thumb. Accessed 20 May 2010
Fischhoff B (1995) Risk perception and communication unplugged: Twenty years of progress. Risk Anal 15:137
Frewer LJ, Howard C, Hedderley D, Shepherd R (1996) What determines trust in information about food-related risks? underlying psychological constructs. Risk Anal 16:473–486
Gigerenzer G, Gaissmaier W, Kurz-Milcke E, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S (2007) Helping doctors and patients make sense of health statistics. Psychol Sci Public Interest 8:53–96
Glik DC (2007) Risk communication for public health emergencies. Ann Rev Public Health 28:33–54
Greenberg M, Truelove H (2010) Right answers and right-wrong answers: Factors influencing knowledge of nuclear-related information. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 44:130–140
Greenberg MR (2009a) How much do people who live near major nuclear facilities worry about those facilities? analysis of national and site-specific data. J Environl Plan Manag 52:19–937
Greenberg MR (2009b) Energy sources, public policy, and public preferences: Analysis of US national and site-specific data. Energy Policy 37:3242–3249
Greenberg MR (2008) Environmental Policy Analysis & Practice. Rutgers University Press, New Jersey
Greenberg MR (2009c) NIMBY, CLAMP, and the location of new nuclear-related facilities: U.S. national and 11 site-specific surveys. Risk Analysis 29:1242–1254
Greenberg MR, Schneider D (1996) Environmentally Devastated Neighborhoods: Perceptions, Policies, and Realities. Rutgers University Press, New Jersey
Hyer RN, Covello VT (2005) Effective Media Communication during Public Health Emergencies. Geneva: World Health Organization
Jasanoff S (1993) Bridging the two cultures of risk Analysis. Risk Analysis 13:123–129
Keller C, Siegrist M, Gutscher H (2006) The role of the affect and availability heuristics in risk communication. Risk Anal 26:631–639
Kraus N, Malmfors T, Slovic P (1992) Intuitive toxicology: Expert and lay judgments of chemical risks. Risk Anal 12:215–232
Lowrance WW (1976) Of Acceptable Risk: Science and the Determination of Safety. William Kaufmann Inc, California
Martin C (2009a) Public Health Image Library (PHIL) Image 11528. http://www.phil.cdc.gov/phil/details.asp. Accessed 20 May 2010
Martin C (2009b) Public Health Image Library (PHIL) Image 11602. http://www.phil.cdc.gov/phil/details.asp. Accessed 20 May 2010
Martin C (2009c) Public Health Image Library (PHIL) Image 11612. http://www.phil.cdc.gov/phil/details.asp. Accessed 20 May 2010
Nagy J (2002) State Environmental Budgets Take $200M Hit. http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=136&languageId=1&contentId=14735. Accessed 7 August 2009
NCI (2002) Making Health Communications Programs Work. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington
Peters RG, Covello VT, McCallum DB (1997) The determinants of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: An empirical study. Risk Anal 17:43
Purvis-Roberts KL, Werner CA, Frank I (2007) Perceived risks from radiation and nuclear testing near semipalatinsk, kazakhstan: A comparison between physicians, scientists, and the public. Risk Anal 27:291–302
Reynolds B, Seeger M (2005) Crisis and emergency risk communication: An integrative approach. J. Health Commun 10:43–55
Sandman PM (1989) Hazard versus outrage in the perception of risk. In: Covello VT (ed) Effective Risk Communication: The Role and Responsibility of Government and Nongovernment Organizations. Plenum Press, New York
Sandman PM (2006) Crisis communication best practices: Some quibbles and additions. J. of Applied Commum Res 34:257–262
Sandman PM (2008) Simplification made Simple. http://www.psandman.com/col/simplify.htm. Accessed 1 Nov 2008
Siegrist M, Gutscher H (2006) Flooding risks: A comparison of lay people’s perceptions and expert’s assessments in switzerland. Risk Anal 26:971–979
Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein, S (1985) Characterizing perceived risk. In: Kates RW (ed) Perilous Progress: Managing the Hazards of Technology. Westview, Colorado
Slovic P (1999) Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Anal 19:689–701
Slovic P, Malmfors T, Krewski D, Mertz CK, Neil N, Bartlett S (1995) Intuitive toxicology. II. expert and lay judgments of chemical risks in Canada. Risk Anal 15:661–675
Still Picture Records Section, Special Media Archives Services Division (1979) President Jimmy Carter Leaving [Three Mile Island] for Middletown, Pennsylvania. http://www.arcweb.archives.gov/arc. Accessed 20 May 2010
Wray R, Rivers J, Whitworth A, Jupka K, Clements B (2006) Public perceptions about trust in emergency risk communication: Qualitative research findings. International Journal Mass Emerg Disasters 24:45–75
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Greenberg, M.R., Babcock-Dunning, L.C. (2011). Communicating Between the Public and Experts: Predictable Differences and Opportunities to Narrow Them. In: Burger, J. (eds) Stakeholders and Scientists. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8813-3_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8813-3_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-8812-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-8813-3
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)