How People Behave in Anticipation of and During Earthquakes: A Review of the Social Science Literature on What Drives this Behaviour
How People Behave in Anticipation of and During Earthquakes: A Review of the Social Science Literature on What Drives this Behaviour
复制标题
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
C. Solberg;H. Joffe;T. Rossetto
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Solberg;H. Joffe;T. Rossetto
本文回顾了社会科学研究是什么动机的人的行为在预期和在地震期间。地震风险认知因心理、社会和环境因素而异，但并不直接决定地震调整。风险认知促使人们评估他们对地震风险的主观控制感。控制水平进一步受到社会文化规范的影响，这些规范涉及谁负责地震调整。如果不相信自己和他人的能力和意愿，以减少地震风险，调整的意图是薄弱的。根据可信的警报采取行动的条件是主观控制感，对自己和他人的安全负责，并相信社区及其领导人在整个灾害周期中采取适当行动。与流行的神话相反，地震时的行为并不受恐慌和非理性的支配。除了生存的首要目标，人们还努力维持利他和理性的社会关系，即使是在陌生人群体中。对这些行为的解释集中在归属于群体的普遍需要上，这使人们能够参与集体解决问题，同时保持安全感和正常感。我们注意到许多研究采用了可疑的方法。从理论上讲，其中大多数依赖于意图-原因-行为模型，该模型仅占行为差异的三分之一以下（Sheerd，2002年）。关于如何为紧急情况做好准备的决定也受到文化价值观、风险的社会表现和情感驱动的判断的影响。这些的整合将有助于跨学科地震研究的更有效的心理学框架。
The paper reviews social science research on what motivates people’s behaviours in anticipation of and during earthquakes. Seismic risk perceptions vary according to psychological, social and environmental factors, but do not directly determine seismic adjustment. Risk perception motivates people to assess their subjective sense of control over earthquake risk. Levels of control are further moderated by sociocultural norms regarding who is responsible for seismic adjustments. Without trust in one’s own and others’ competence and willingness to reduce earthquake exposure, adjustment intentions are weak. Acting on credible warnings is conditional on a sense of subjective control, feeling responsible for one’s own and others’ safety, and trusting the community and its leaders to take appropriate action throughout the entire disaster cycle. Behaviour during earthquakes is, contrary to popular myths, not dominated by panic and irrationality. Besides the overarching goal of survival, people strive to maintain altruistic and rational social relations, even among groups of strangers. Explanations for these behaviours centre on the universal need to belong to groups, which allows people to engage in collective problem-solving while maintaining a sense of safety and normality. We note that many studies employ questionable methods. Theoretically, most of them rely on the intention-causes-behaviour model, which only accounts for under a third of the variance in behaviour (Sheeran, 2002). Decisions on how to prepare for emergencies are also shaped by cultural values, social representations of risk and emotionally-driven judgments. An integration of these would facilitate a more valid psychological framework for interdisciplinary earthquake research.