Communicating with the Public About Marauding Terrorist Firearms Attacks: Results from a Survey Experiment on Factors Influencing Intention to “Run, Hide, Tell” in the United Kingdom and Denmark

Communicating with the Public About Marauding Terrorist Firearms Attacks: Results from a Survey Experiment on Factors Influencing Intention to “Run, Hide, Tell” in the United Kingdom and Denmark
复制标题

与公众就抢劫性恐怖枪械袭击进行沟通:对英国和丹麦“逃跑、隐藏、告密”意图影响因素的调查实验结果

DOI:
10.1111/risa.13301
复制
发表时间:
2019
期刊:
影响因子:
3.8
通讯作者:
M. Rogers
M. Rogers
中科院分区:
医学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
J. Pearce;Lasse Lindekilde;David Parker;M. Rogers

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

有效的风险沟通是应对恐怖主义不可或缺的一部分,但直到最近,在欧洲,很少有事前沟通向公众提供在袭击期间如何保护自己的建议。2015年11月,在法国巴黎发生大规模恐怖袭击事件后,英国国家警察局长委员会发布了一部“保持安全”的电影和传单,建议公众在发生枪支或武器袭击时“逃跑”、“躲藏”和“报警”。然而,包括丹麦在内的其他国家没有提供这类防备信息,这在很大程度上是因为担心吓到公众。在这项调查实验中,3003名英国和丹麦的参与者被随机分配到三种情况中的一种:没有信息,传单干预和电影干预,以检查“逃跑,躲藏,告诉”建议对恐怖主义,安全服务以及假想的恐怖分子枪支袭击的预期反应的看法的影响。结果表明,事前沟通在增强信任、鼓励保护性健康行为和阻止潜在危险行为方面具有重要益处。然而,这些发现也表明,未来的沟通应该解决感知响应成本和目标具体的问题行为。跨国反应的相似性表明,这一建议适用于其他国家。
Effective risk communication is an integral part of responding to terrorism, but until recently, there has been very little pre‐event communication in a European context to provide advice to the public on how to protect themselves during an attack. Following terrorist attacks involving mass shootings in Paris, France, in November 2015, the U.K. National Police Chiefs’ Council released a Stay Safe film and leaflet that advises the public to “run,” “hide,” and “tell” in the event of a firearms or weapons attack. However, other countries, including Denmark, do not provide preparedness information of this kind, in large part because of concern about scaring the public. In this survey experiment, 3,003 U.K. and Danish participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: no information, a leaflet intervention, and a film intervention to examine the impact of “Run, Hide, Tell” advice on perceptions about terrorism, the security services, and intended responses to a hypothetical terrorist firearms attack. Results demonstrate important benefits of pre‐event communication in relation to enhancing trust, encouraging protective health behaviors, and discouraging potentially dangerous actions. However, these findings also suggest that future communications should address perceived response costs and target specific problem behaviors. Cross‐national similarities in response suggest this advice is suitable for adaptation in other countries.