risk communication dissertation

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

The Landscape of Risk Communication Research: A Scientometric Analysis

Floris goerlandt.

1 Department of Industrial Engineering, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2, Canada; [email protected]

2 Department of Safety Science and Engineering, School of Ocean Science and Engineering, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China; moc.621@yrrej_eijil

3 State Key Laboratory of Explosion Science and Technology, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China

Genserik Reniers

4 Safety and Security Science, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, 2628 BX Delft, The Netherlands

5 Antwerp Research Group on Safety and Security (ARGoSS), Faculty of Applied Economics, University of Antwerp, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium

6 Centre for Economics and Corporate Sustainability (CEDON), KU Leuven, 1000 Brussels, Belgium

Risk communication is a significant research domain with practical importance in supporting societal risk governance and informed private decision making. In this article, a high-level analysis of the risk communication research domain is performed using scientometrics methods and visualization tools. Output trends and geographical patterns are identified, and patterns in scientific categories determined. A journal distribution analysis provides insights into dominant journals and the domain’s intellectual base. Thematic clusters and temporal evolution of focus topics are obtained using a terms analysis, and a co-citation analysis provides insights into the evolution of research fronts and key documents. The results indicate that the research volume grows exponentially, with by far most contributions originating from Western countries. The domain is highly interdisciplinary, rooted in psychology and social sciences, and branching mainly into medicine and environmental sciences. Narrative themes focus on risk communication in medical and societal risk governance contexts. The domain originated from public health and environmental concerns, with subsequent research fronts addressing risk communication concepts and models. Applied research fronts are associated with environmental hazards, public health, medical risks, nuclear power, and emergency response to various natural hazards. Based on the results, various avenues for future research are described.

1. Introduction

Risk communication is an essential aspect of risk management and governance. In the ISO 31000 standard for organizational risk management by the International Organization for Standardization [ 1 ], risk communication is part of the ‘communication and consultation’ activity of the risk management process, with the primary aims to promote awareness and understanding of risks. Although not without its critics [ 2 , 3 ] and notwithstanding ongoing work to define its conceptual basis [ 4 ], this standard is very influential across industrial domains as a platform for sharing best practices and as a catalyst for professionalization of risk management [ 5 , 6 ]. Through its provisions, the need for risk communication is highlighted, for instance, in supply chain risk [ 7 ], maritime oil spill preparedness and response [ 8 ], firefighting [ 9 ], and mining safety [ 10 ].

In the influential risk governance framework by the International Risk Governance Council [ 11 ], risk communication aims to ensure consideration of a plurality of values and interests in order to enable acceptance and social license of risk management strategies by societal actors. The IRGC’s framework has been applied in contexts such as food health and safety [ 12 ], drinking water quality [ 13 ], offshore oil [ 14 ], and autonomous vessels [ 15 ]. Within a risk governance context, several authors have described evolutions and trends in risk communication [ 16 , 17 , 18 ]. In general, these authors find that the focus in the early era was on explaining technical aspects of risk assessment, whereas more recent approaches focus on two-way communication with consideration of public concerns and risk perceptions, which is achieved through stakeholder involvement strategies.

Given the wide range of application domains where the importance of effective risk communication has been recognized, it is not surprising that risk communication has been an active research area. To provide summary insights into this increasingly extensive body of literature, several review articles have been published. Some of these focus on generic aspects of risk communication, such as its functions and associated problems [ 19 ], the assessment of effectiveness of communication interventions [ 20 ], the use of probabilistic information [ 21 ] or maps [ 22 ], or ethical aspects [ 23 ], while other reviews summarize the literature on the communication of specific risks such as vaccine-related risks [ 24 ], cancer screening [ 25 ], public health emergencies [ 26 ], and natural disasters [ 27 ].

While these reviews provide insights into specific approaches to risk communication, in some key aspects, or in research related to specific risks, there currently is no high-level analysis of the risk communication research domain. Scientometric analysis methods and associated visualization techniques enable obtaining insights into structural developments of a research domain, including temporal and geographical trends in outputs and focus topics, collaboration networks, scientific categories and thematic clusters, and co-citation networks and associated research fronts [ 28 ]. While narrative reviews are more suited to obtain focused insights into narrower issues [ 29 ], scientometric analyses have been developed to obtain knowledge about the high-level structure and dynamics of a research domain, using quantitative metrics and mathematical techniques [ 30 , 31 , 32 ]. Such high-level knowledge is primarily useful for researchers engaged in a given research domain to better understand its scope, nature, and development trends; its focus topics and themes; and key documents and authors. This is especially useful for early career researchers who are relatively new to the domain, but can also be helpful for experienced academics, for instance, in preparing lecture materials, or for journal editors to focus research attention on hot topics, e.g., by opening special issues on a specific theme. Several scientometric analyses have been published on risk, safety, health, and environment-related topics. These include an analysis of safety culture [ 33 ], road safety [ 34 ], resilient health care [ 35 ], sustainability and sustainable development [ 36 ], disaster risk management [ 37 ], slip and falls at worksites [ 38 ], electronic cigarettes [ 39 ], health and young people’s social networks [ 40 ], and process safety in China [ 41 ].

In light of this, the aim of this article is to present a scientometric analysis of the risk communication research domain. The specific research questions are as follows:

• RQ1. What are the overall publication trends in terms of publication output?
• RQ2. What geographic trends can be observed at a country level?
• RQ3. What scientific categories are strongly represented?
• RQ4. What journals are dominant knowledge carriers and what knowledge do these draw on?
• RQ5. What are the dominant narrative topics, and what is their temporal evolution?
• RQ6. What is the evolution in research clusters, associated research fronts, and key documents?

The remainder of this article is organized as follows. In Section 2 , the document search strategy, data retrieval process, and resulting dataset are described, followed by a brief overview of the scientometric techniques and tools to answer the above research questions. The results and their interpretation are presented in Section 3 . In Section 4 , a discussion is given, contextualizing the work and providing directions for future research. Section 5 concludes.

2. Materials and Methods

There are four main steps in a typical scientometric analysis: formulating questions, data retrieval, application of suitable scientometric methods and tools, and interpretation of the results. The data retrieval strategy and resulting dataset is described in Section 2.1 , and the scientometric methods and tools are briefly introduced in Section 2.2 .

2.1. Data Retrieval Strategy and Resulting Dataset

The world’s largest and most comprehensive database of scientific publications, Web of Science Core Collections (WOSCC) was applied in this study to retrieve a high-quality dataset. Compared to other popular databases such as Scopus, SciFinder, or Google Scholar, WOSCC is the most comprehensive one across scientific disciplines, while also having a very high data quality [ 28 ]. The following search strategy was applied in the WOSCC database on 13 March 2020:

• Title = “risk communication” AND
• Document type = NOT (correction OR early access)

A title-based search strategy was applied in order to ensure that identified documents indeed focus on risk communication. A prior exploratory search based on title, abstract, and keywords led to a much larger dataset of over 5500 documents. Of these, many are however not directly relevant to obtaining insights into the risk communication research domain but instead mention risk communication more tangentially while focusing on risk perception, stakeholder participation, or other aspects of risk management or governance. With the applied title-based search process, all document types are retained in the resulting dataset, except articles presenting authors’ corrections to earlier publications and early access articles, i.e., articles which were not yet in final print at the time of the search. The timespan covered in the search ranges from 1900 until 2019 (inclusive).

The resulting dataset contained 1196 articles, which can be considered as the core scientific body of literature on risk communication. Table 1 contains some key descriptive information of this dataset, obtained through the R package Bibliometrix [ 42 ]. The results, which partially answer RQ1, show that risk communication research spans from 1985 to 2019, with 523 different journals contributing to the domain’s literature. In total, 3137 authors have (co-)authored at least one document, with only 296 authors having contributed a single-authored document. By far, most of the work is the result of multi-author collaboration, as can be seen from the high collaboration index of 3.39 and the average number of co-authors per document. The average number of citations per document is 14.82, which is relatively high. This indicates that risk communication research is quite impactful in the academic community.

Descriptive information of the dataset on risk communication research.

2.2. Applied Scientometric Methods: Techniques and Tools

Various scientometrics methods were applied to answer the research questions listed in Section 1 . Scientometric analysis involves the application of quantitative methods for detecting trends, patterns, and developments of a scientific research domain [ 43 ]. By visualizing quantitative metrics which represent informational aspects of the research domain, insights are obtained into its scope, contents, and development [ 44 ]. Table 2 contains an overview of the techniques and tools used to answer the research questions in this study. These are briefly described below.

Overview of scientometric techniques and tools used to answer the research questions.

Trends in research outputs (RQ1) are basic scientometric indicators, providing insights into the development of research activity over time. Apart from a simple count of publications per year, a regression analysis was performed to estimate the rate of change. Other basic trends of the publications in the research domain were determined by elementary summary statistics, using Bibliometrix software [ 42 ].

The geographic patterns (RQ2) were identified by counting the number of articles originating from the different countries/regions in the world. For each country-related subset of the data, additional metrics were calculated to provide insight in the temporal activity of different geographical areas and to assess the average impact of publications from the areas. Bibliometrix software was used for these basic calculations [ 42 ]. To identify collaboration networks between countries/regions in risk communication research, the visualization of similarities mapping technique was applied [ 45 ]. This technique quantitatively analyzes similarities between documents according to a chosen data object, in this case country/region of origin. The VOSviewer software determines citation networks in which the distance between nodes shows the level of closeness to each other and the node size represents the number of documents [ 50 ].

Insights into the scientific categories represented in risk communication research (RQ3) were obtained by mapping the journal categories on the global science map [ 46 ]. This map shows clusters of different scientific disciplines, providing a high-level visual overview of the complete scientific body of knowledge. Mapping the journal categories associated with the risk communication publications of the obtained dataset provides insights into what scientific domains actively contribute to the development of knowledge in this research area. The analysis and visualization were done with VOSviewer [ 45 ].

The information flow to and between journals as knowledge carriers in risk communication research (RQ4) was analyzed using the dual-map overlay [ 48 ]. This map shows the interconnections between over 10,000 journals, where these journals are grouped in regions representing publication and citation activities at the domain level [ 51 ]. The dual-map overlay enables insights into how specific domains of knowledge (citing articles) are influenced by other domains (cited literature), where the latter can be regarded as the intellectual base of the knowledge domain in focus [ 48 ].

The dominant narrative patterns in the risk communication domain (RQ5) were identified using the automatic term identification method [ 49 ] to extract terms or noun phrases from the bibliographic data about the documents in the dataset. In the present work, terms are extracted from title, abstract, and keywords. A data cleaning process was applied to combine similar terms in the resulting term list. VOSviewer [ 45 ] was applied to cluster the terms, to determine associated heat maps, and to obtain additional bibliometric indicators such as the average publication year and average impact of terms. This information provides insights into trending topics over time and helps to determine topics that are scientifically fruitful.

The evolution of research clusters, research fronts, and key documents (RQ6) was performed through a co-citation analysis using CiteSpace software [ 47 ]. Co-citation analysis was first proposed by Small [ 52 ] as a method to measure the relationship between two documents. Two documents are co-cited when they appear together in an article’s reference list. Resting on the premise that articles focusing on similar themes will cite partially the same articles, co-citation information in a set of documents provides high-level insights into the similarities between documents, from which research clusters can be identified. Recognizing that cited references can be considered indicative of the intellectual basis of a given area of research, the highly cited articles in these clusters can be considered key documents driving a domain of scientific work [ 53 ]. Furthermore, the articles citing most references from a given co-citation cluster are known as research fronts. In scientometrics research, these research fronts are considered to be the figureheads of a research cluster, providing insight in a subdomain of academic focus [ 54 ].

In this section, the results of the various scientific analyses are shown and interpreted. Each subsection presents the analysis results to answer research questions RQ1 to RQ6.

3.1. Temporal Distribution

The annual trend of publication activity in the risk communication research domain is shown in Figure 1 . The first article was published in 1985, entitled “A Nonadvocate Model for Health Risk Communications”, authored by Petcovic and Johnson [ 55 ]. This indicates that risk communication research originates from a practical need to inform patients about health risks. The global trend of annual number of publications and the associated cumulative number shows an exponential increase. After a period with only a handful of publications annually at the initial stage of development of the research domain in the mid-1980s, a relatively steady stream of about 15 articles per year was published between about 1990 and 2000. From then onwards, the number of publications escalated quickly, with an increase to over 70 articles published annually after 2015. The research volume before 1990 amounts to 2.9% of the total, with the relative share of the period of 1990–1999 rising to 12.0%, further increasing to 29.3% in the period of 2000–2009, and finally reaching 55.8% in the period after 2010. This shows that risk communication research has experienced a rather dramatic increase in research productivity since its inception.

Yearly outputs of risk communication research.

3.2. Geographical Distribution

Figure 2 shows the geographic distribution of risk communication research globally. It is seen that, in total, 63 countries/regions have contributed to the 1196 documents comprising the dataset obtained in Section 2.1 . The most productive countries, defined here as those with more than five publications, are listed in Table 3 . For these countries, additional metrics including the average publication year and the average number of citations are determined as well.

Geographical distribution of global risk communication research.

High-productivity countries/regions in risk communication.

Note: NP = number of publications; TC = total citations; AC = average citations per paper; APY = average publication year; Degree = number of collaborating countries/regions of a node in the network. Colors in columns NP, TC, and AC indicate the relative impact of the countries, with deeper shades of red signifying more impact and deeper shades of blue less impact. The color scheme in the column ‘Degree’ is similar, with deeper red shades signifying more international collaborations, and blue shades fewer collaborations. In the column APY, deeper shades of red signify more recent research contributions, while deeper blue shades indicate more temporally distant publications.

It is seen that the vast majority of risk communication research originates from Western countries, with the United States of America (502 articles, 41.9%), the United Kingdom (177, 14.8%), Germany (93, 7.8%), the Netherlands (68, 5.7%), and Canada (58, 4.8%) comprising the top five most productive countries. The dominance of North America and Western Europe in research productivity is striking, while the research activity in Oceania, Asia, Eastern Europe, South America, and Africa is much lower. Australia and Japan are the only countries outside North America or Europe in the top 10. Within Europe, by far, most of the work originates from the United Kingdom, Germany, and the Netherlands, with Italy, Sweden, France, Norway, and Spain also contributing moderately. Eastern Europe is very poorly represented in risk communication research. In Asia, the research is most developed in the Far East, including Japan, the People’s Republic of China, and South Korea.

Despite the lower productivity in absolute terms, it is found that some countries in the list of Table 3 , such as the People’s Republic of China and South Korea, have only relatively recently become active in this research domain. The top five most productive countries have been active for a much longer time, as seen from their comparatively low average year of publication. In terms of impact, the top highly productive countries also generally contribute the most impactful research. As is seen from the average number of citations, research originating from the USA, UK, Canada, and the Netherlands has attracted most citations on average, while work from some less productive countries including Switzerland, Israel, and Belgium also ranks relatively highly. The scientific impact of other countries is in general rather low, with average citation rates of around 5. This underscores the dominance of North America and Western Europe in the risk communication research domain.

The country collaboration network, shown in Figure 3 , shows that the most active countries in North American and Western Europe, the United States of America and the United Kingdom, are also the ones with most international collaborations. Transatlantic collaboration is strongest between the USA and the UK, but Germany and the Netherlands also have such links. While the USA has the strongest academic links with Canada, Australia, Japan, China, and South Korea, the UK has stronger links with other European countries.

Countries/regions collaboration network in risk communication research (NP > 5).

3.3. Scientific Categories

Each journal in the Web of Science Core Collection is classified according to different scientific categories. This categorization serves as a marker of the scientific disciplines and domains with which the journals are concerned. Aggregating these categorizations over the complete dataset obtained in Section 2.2 provides insights into how the risk communication research domain situates in the entire body of scientific knowledge.

The distribution of scientific categories associated with risk communication is shown on the global science map [ 56 ] using the VOSviewer software [ 45 ]. The results are shown in Figure 4 , where the global scientific categories are grouped in five clusters. These are #1 ‘ Biology and Medicine ’, #2 ‘ Chemistry and Physics ’, #3 ‘ Ecology and Environmental Science and Technology ’, #4 ‘ Engineering and Mathematics ’, and #5 ‘ Psychology and Social Sciences ’.

Scientific categories of risk communication research on global science map.

Table 4 provides an overview of the most frequently occurring scientific categories in risk communication research, here defined as categories in which at least 20 articles are classified. Furthermore, the average publication year and average number of citations of these categories are shown, providing insight in the temporal evolution of and the scientific impact associated with these categories. The table also indicates which cluster of Figure 4 the scientific category is located in, for easier interpretation of the figure.

Scientific categories with more than 20 papers on risk communication published.

Note: NP = number of publications; APY = average publication year; AC = average citations per paper; Cluster = main science domain as per the global science map of Figure 4 . Colors in columns NP and AC indicate the relative impact of the scientific categories, with deeper shades of red signifying more impact and deeper shades of blue less impact. In the column APY, deeper shades of red signify more recent research contributions, while deeper blue shades indicate more temporally distant publications. The colors in the column ‘Cluster’ correspond to the colors of the clusters as shown in Figure 4 .

The results indicate that risk communication research is primarily located in the ‘ Psychology and Social Sciences ’ scientific domain (cluster #5). Within that cluster, the scientific categories ‘ Public, Environmental, and Occupational Health ’ (362 articles, 30.3% of the total dataset), ‘ Social Sciences, Mathematical Methods ’ (89, 7.4%), ‘ Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary ’ (86, 7.2%), ‘ Communication ’ (67, 5.6%), and ‘ Psychology, Multidisciplinary ’ (42, 3.5%) are the most actively contributing. The second most prevalent scientific domain is ‘ Biology and Medicine ’ (cluster #1), in which the scientific categories ‘ Medicine, General and Internal ’ (67, 5.6%), ‘ Toxicology ’ (65, 5.4%), ‘ Pharmacology and Pharmacy ’ (64, 5.3%), ‘ Oncology ’ (42, 3.5%), and ‘ Food Science and Technology ’ (39, 3.3%) are the highest contributors. The third most significantly contributing scientific domain is ‘ Ecology and Environmental Science and Technology ’ (cluster #3). Here, the scientific categories ‘ Environmental Sciences ’ (105, 8.8%), ‘ Water Resources ’ (41, 3.4%), ‘ Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences ’ (34, 2.8%), and ‘ Geosciences, Multidisciplinary ’ (24, 2.0%) are highly contributing scientific categories. The scientific domains ‘ Engineering and Mathematics ’ (cluster #4) and ‘Chemistry and Physics’ (cluster #2) are contribute significantly less to the risk communication research domain, with only ‘ Mathematics, Interdisciplinary Application ’ (88, 7.4%), ‘ Nuclear Science and Technology ’ (28, 2.3%), and ‘ Engineering, Civil ’ (21, 1.8%) being highly contributing scientific categories.

Apart from highlighting the main contributing scientific categories, the visualization of risk communication research on the global science map in Figure 4 also indicates that this research domain is highly interdisciplinary. While the research domain appears to have a very application-oriented focus, especially on health and environmental risks, its scientific foundations lie in social sciences. Furthermore, mathematical methods and their interdisciplinary application in social sciences also are an important aspect in the research domain. While there are some generic scientific categories of the social sciences represented, e.g., ‘ Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary ’ and ‘ Psychology, Multidisciplinary ’, the only significantly contributing specific communications-oriented social science categories with specific relevance to the domain’s conceptual basis are ‘ Communication ’ and ‘ Information Science and Library Science ’. This shows that most work in the risk communication domain originates from practical needs in specific risk management and governance contexts, rather than as a subdiscipline from communications research.

To further support the finding that risk communication is highly interdisciplinary, the Stirling-Rao diversity index is calculated. This metric measures the aggregate distance between connected scientific categories, giving more weight to connected article pairs associated with more distant categories [ 57 ]. For the risk communication research domain, the global diversity index is 0.803, which is a very high score. This indicates that there is a high diversity in scientific categories concerned with this domain, and that these collectively contribute to the knowledge production.

Focusing on Table 4 , the average year in which articles in a category are published shows that the oldest categories are ‘ Social Sciences, Mathematical Methods ’ and ‘ Mathematics, Interdisciplinary Applications ’, which are among the most active categories overall. Most application-oriented categories have an average publication year around 2010, with some variation. Categories in which the contributions appear significantly earlier (average before 2008) are ‘ Engineering, Civil ’, ‘ Nuclear Science and Technology ’, ‘ Public, Environmental, and Occupational Health ’ and ‘ Environmental Sciences ’. More recently emerging categories (average after 2012) include ‘ Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences ’ and ‘ Geosciences, Multidisciplinary ’. In terms of research impact, it is found that several categories from cluster #5 ‘ Psychology and Social Sciences ’ are highly impactful, including ‘ Information Science and Library Science ’, ‘ Social Sciences, Mathematical Methods ’, ‘ Health Policy and Services ’, and ‘ Health Care Sciences and Services ’. In other science clusters, impactful categories are ‘ Mathematics, Interdisciplinary Applications ’ (cluster #4), ‘ Medical Informatics ’ and ‘ Medicine, General and Internal ’ (cluster #1). Remarkably, highly productive application-focused categories in other scientific clusters are much less academically impactful, with even categories which became active comparatively early, such as ‘ Environmental Sciences ’ and ‘ Water Resources ’ (cluster #3), ‘ Engineering, Civil ’ (cluster #4), and ‘ Nuclear Science and Technology ’ (cluster #2) receiving few citations on average. This shows that, in general, medicine- and health-related risk communication work is more impactful. Nevertheless, the above-identified recently emerging categories ‘ Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences ’ and ‘ Geosciences, Multidisciplinary ’ (cluster #3) also have a comparatively high average number of citations and hence academic impact, given their relatively short time to attract citations.

3.4. Journals’ Distribution and Intellectual Base

A dual-map overlay analysis is applied to identify highly productive and highly cited journals in the risk communication research domain and to trace their intellectual basis. The results are shown in Figure 5 and Table 5 .

Dual-map overlay of risk communication papers on the global science map, on the basis of journals.

Top 10 highly productive journals and highly cited journals in risk communication research.

Note: NP = Number of publications; NC = Number of citations.

The dual-map overlay analysis is performed using CiteSpace [ 47 ] and the journal-based dual-map overlay created by Carley and his colleagues [ 46 ]. It shows the journals of a specific dataset (here the risk communication dataset of Section 2.2 ) on the global science map of journals. The analysis then traces the cited journals in the reference list of those journals, puts those on another journal overlay map, and links both maps. To facilitate the interpretation, labeled ovals are used to indicate clusters of highly active citing and cited journals. The size of the ovals is proportionate to the number of publications for the citing journals on the left and to the number of citations received from the risk communication articles by a journal on the right. Thus, on the left-hand side of the upper part of Figure 5 , the distribution of risk communication journals on the global science map is shown, whereas the right-hand side shows the distribution of cited journals. The bottom part of Figure 5 further condensed the information by concentrating lines between citing and cited journal clusters. This is done by adjusting the width of the lines proportional to the frequency of citation, making use of the so-called z-score of the citation links [ 51 ].

The upper part of Figure 5 shows that risk communication articles are mainly published in ‘ Psychology, Education, Health ’ and ‘ Medicine, Medical, Clinical ’ journal groups. The cited journals, which can be considered to constitute the intellectual basis of the research domain, are primarily clustered in the ‘ Health, Nursing, Medicine ’ and ‘ Psychology, Education, Social ’ journal groups. The lower part of Figure 5 shows the main journal groups and their connections, where the line widths are scaled using the z-score. It is seen that journals from the ‘ Psychology, Education, Health ’ journal groups in risk communication research mainly have cited journals from the ‘ Health, Nursing, Medicine ’ and ‘ Psychology, Education, Social’ groups. The citing journals from ‘ Medicine, Medical, Clinical ’ have predominantly cited journals from the ‘ Health, Nursing, Medicine ’ group. This is also reflected in the results of the calculated z-scores for the citation trends at the domain level, as shown in Table 6 .

Citation trends of risk communication at a domain level.

It is also seen that nearly all citing journal groups cite journals from the ‘ Psychology, Education, Social’ journal group, while furthermore relying on a relatively small group of journal domains, mostly health- and environment-related. This implies that, despite the high level of interdisciplinarity as found in Section 3.3 , the intellectual basis of risk communication research remains relatively focused within specific scientific subdomains. Articles furthermore appear to often cite articles from their own journal group.

Table 5 shows the top 10 highly productive citing journals of the risk communication research domain, as well as the journals with the highest number of citations. It is seen that Risk Analysis and Journal of Risk Research are by far the most productive journals, followed at a distance by medical- and health-related journals such as Drug Safety and Journal of Health Communication . For the cited journals, it is found that by far most references are received by Risk Analysis , with British Medical Journal , Medical Decision Making , Journal of Risk Research , and Science .

3.5. Terms Analysis: Narrative Patterns

The automatic term identification method in the VOSviewer software [ 45 , 49 ] is applied to extract terms and noun phrases related to the risk communication dataset of Section 2.1 . In the present work, these are extracted from the title, abstract, and keywords. Only terms which appeared at least five times are retained for further analysis, with similar terms are merged to increase clarity in and focus of the results, as is commonly recommended in scientometric analyses [ 28 ]. In total, 458 terms are retained, which are clustered using VOSviewer and subsequently transformed in heat maps to identify concentrations of higher activity. Figure 6 shows the dominant narrative patterns of the entire dataset, indicating the existence of two large clusters. Table 7 lists the terms analysis results for these two clusters, along with additional information such as the number of occurrences, the average publication year in which the terms appeared, and the average citations received. Additionally, Figure 7 and Figure 8 show a term density map of the term clusters by average year of publication of the terms, which highlights the temporal evolution of the clusters.

Term density map of risk communication research, all documents (458 terms included).

Term density map of risk communication research, average publication year before 2010, (227 terms included).

Term density map of risk communication research, average publication year after 2010, (231 terms included).

List of risk communication terms with more than 20 term occurrences.

Note: NOC = number of occurrences; APY = average publication year; AC = average number of citations. Colors in columns NOC and AC indicate the relative impact of the terms, with deeper shades of red signifying more impact and deeper shades of blue less impact. In the column APY, deeper shades of red signify more recent research contributions, while deeper blue shades indicate more temporally distant publications.

In the left cluster in Figure 6 (Cluster A in Table 7 ), the main terms are ‘ agency ’, ‘ government ’, ‘ stakeholder ’, ‘ organization ’, and ‘ case study ’, whereas in the right cluster (Cluster B in Table 7 ), the most frequently occurring terms are ‘ patient ’, ‘ intervention ’, ‘ decision making ’, ‘ probability ’, and ‘ woman ’. On a high level, this indicates that the risk communication domain contains two major domains of work. On the one hand, there is a role for risk communication in societal risk governance, where governmental agencies interact with stakeholders from industry, the public, and academics in regard to societal risks, as in the IRGC risk governance framework [ 11 ] mentioned in the introduction. On the other hand, there is an important role for risk communication on a more personal level in medical contexts, where medical practitioners interact with patients about treatments of specific medical conditions, as in the guidance by the Risk Communication Institute [ 58 ]. The most frequently occurring keywords here are ‘ patient ’, ‘ intervention ’, ‘ decision making ’, ‘ probability ’, and ‘ woman ’.

Table 7 and Figure 6 show that risk issues around ‘ public health ’, ‘ food ’, ‘ floods ’, ‘ disasters ’, (disease) ‘ outbreak ’, and ‘ emergency ’ are important topics in cluster A (societal risk governance). Methodological and conceptual aspects of risk communication in societal risk governance such as ‘ debate ’, ‘ public perception ’, ‘ dialogue ’, ‘ social medium ’, and ‘ credibility ’ are important in this narrative. From Figure 7 and Figure 8 and Table 7 , it is found that earlier narratives were more strongly focused on government agencies, industry, scientists, and public participation. Topics included public health, environmental risks, and food. Dominant narratives after 2010 became stakeholders and organizations, with more attention to emergencies, crises, disasters, preparedness, outbreaks and disease control, and consumer products. Academically impactful methodological narratives in Cluster A revolve around communicators, communication efforts and efficacy, audience, public perception, and public participation. Impactful topic-focused narratives concern disaster, crisis, emergency, and flood.

In Cluster B (medical risk communication), important narratives revolve around risk issues such as ‘ treatment ’, ‘ age ’, ‘ family ’, ‘ cancer ’, ‘ diagnosis ’, ‘ medicine ’, and ‘ screening ’. Methodological and conceptual aspects of medical risk communication include ‘ probability ’, ‘ scale ’, ‘ scenario ’, ‘ skill ’, ‘ decision making ’, ‘ test ’, and ‘ patient knowledge ’. Inspecting Figure 7 and Figure 8 and Table 7 shows that narratives around decision making, probability, treatment, cancer, family, woman, and consultation were dominant before 2010. After 2010, narratives focused more on patients, intervention, risk factors, age, and intentions. Academically impactful narratives in Cluster B involve skill, relative risk, scale, decision making, subject, systematic review, tests, and frequency.

Overall, the results show that some narratives are rather robust in the risk communication research domain, with a continued focus on patient-, treatment-, and risk-related information in Cluster B and a continued attention to societal health risks. The results also indicate that risk communication in emergency and disaster contexts has become a topic of academic interest more recently.

3.6. Cited References—Research Fronts

CiteSpace [ 47 ] is applied in this section to perform a co-citation analysis of the risk communication dataset of Section 2.1 in order to determine research clusters based on co-citation information. Co-occurrence of certain references in a set of articles within a research domain is a commonly used technique in scientometric research to identify clusters [ 28 ]. Highly cited references within these clusters can be understood as the intellectual basis of the subdomains and represent key knowledge carriers for the development of the research domain. Articles citing the largest number of references from a cluster are known as ‘research fronts’. These can be seen as spearheading contributions leading the development of the research domain, and together they provide insight in the overall evolution of the research domain in terms of focus topics [ 38 , 51 ].

In order to obtain a clear structure of the results, the co-citation analysis is here performed for the entire timespan of the dataset (1985–2019), using a time slice length of one year, an eight year look-back period of considering cited references, and a minimum of two citations per period. The resulting co-citation network has 1157 nodes and 3924 co-citation links. The largest connected component of this co-citation network is shown in Figure 9 to show the most important parts of the structure and the intellectual basis of the research clusters. The labels of the clusters determined by CiteSpace are extracted from the title of the citing publications, based on the log-likelihood ratio (LLR) method. In the figure, the node sizes are proportional to the number of citations of a publication, while the colors of the links between articles indicates the year when two documents were first cited together. The color shade of the clusters indicates the average publication year of the references. The main analysis results of the co-citation analysis for the largest network of connected clusters is shown in Table 8 . This table shows the name of the research cluster, the number of references included in the cluster, the associated article representing the research front, the average year of publication of the cited references, and the silhouette value. The silhouette value of a cluster ranges from −1 to 1 and indicates the uncertainty which needs to be considered when interpreting the nature of the cluster. A value of 1 represents a perfect separation from other clusters [ 59 ].

Clusters of co-citation network of risk communication research.

Research clusters in risk communication research in connected largest network, clusters including a minimum of five references.

Note: Size = number of publications in the cluster; Avg (YR) = the average publication year of the references in the cluster; LLR Title Terms = terms in the title based on the log-likelihood ratio; Research Front = article which cited most papers from the cluster.

In Figure 10 , the five most highly cited references in each research cluster are shown. As explained above, these can be considered as the intellectual base of each subdomain of risk communication research. Table 9 provides additional information of the top five highly cited references in the largest co-citation clusters, defined here as clusters with a minimum of 50 articles, as shown as well in Table 8 . Only references with a minimum of five citations are retained.

Top five highly cited references in each co-citation network cluster.

Top five highly cited references with at least five citations received in the largest co-citation clusters (NP > 50) of Figure 10 , see also Table 8 .

Note: PY = publication year.

The landscape and time evolution of the clusters shows that the earliest research fronts of risk communication research focus on ‘ υ Industrial Contamination ’ and ‘ σ Public Health ’, with 1982 and 1986 being the average publication years of the cited references, respectively. This indicates that risk communication research arose from a practical need to inform the public about health and environmental risks. Thereafter, there were several research clusters which focused on better understanding risk communication as an activity in itself, which can be considered as a type of fundamental risk research [ 67 ]. These include ‘ δ Rational Public Discourse ’ (average publication year of cited references: 1988), ‘ β Learning through Conflict ’ (1989), ‘ π Intended vs. Received Message ’ (2000), and ‘ φ Aggressive Risk Communication ’ (2012). Nevertheless, the bulk of the risk communication research clusters remained focused on specific risk issues throughout the evolution of the research domain, in line with societal concerns or contemporary focus topics in medical research. Examples of such research clusters associated with the societal risk governance cluster (Cluster A of Section 3.5 ) include ‘ ξ Nuclear Power ’ (1986), ‘ η Epidemic and Bioterrorism ’ (1996), ‘ μ Natural Disaster Evacuation ’ (2005), ‘ ζ Flood Risk Communication ’ (2009), and ‘ θ Hurricane Risk ’ (2013). Examples of research clusters associated with medical risk communication research (Cluster B of Section 3.5 ) include ‘ κ Supervision Register ’ (1992), ‘ λ Patient Risk Communication Effectiveness ’ (1997), ‘ ε General Practice Patient Involvement ’ (2001), and ‘ ι Pharmaceutical Risk–Benefit ’ (2012).

Referring to Table 8 and Table 9 , the largest cluster spans 84 articles with a silhouette value of 0.769, indicating a relatively large overlap with other clusters. It is labeled ‘ α Pictographs ’ based on LLR analysis. The research front is [ 60 ], which focuses on the use of pictographs for communicating medical screening information to persons with higher and lower numeracy skills. This cluster is associated with Cluster B (medical risk communication) of Section 3.5 , draws on ‘ Health, Nursing, and Medicine ’ and ‘ Psychology, Education, Social ’ journals of the global science map of Section 3.4 , and involves scientific categories in the clusters ‘ #1 Biology and Medicine ’ and ‘ #5 Psychology and Social Sciences ’ on the global science map of Section 3.3 . The most highly cited reference in this cluster is [ 68 ], which focuses on best practices on conveying health risks using numeric, verbal, and visual formats. Other highly cited references include [ 58 , 69 , 70 , 71 ], which focus on patient understanding of risks, numeracy, and the relation to decision making. The cluster also contains a review on the use of probability information in risk communication [ 21 , 71 ].

The second largest cluster is labeled ‘ β Learning through Conflict ’. It includes 78 references with a silhouette value of 0.931, indicating that it is well separated from other clusters. Its research front is [ 61 ], which focuses on the role of conflict in risk communication, as a means of learning in contexts where controversy exists between stakeholders. This cluster is associated with Cluster A (societal risk governance) of Section 3.5 , draws on mainly on journals from ‘ Psychology, Education, Social ’ journals on the global science map of Section 3.4 , and is based on the scientific category ‘ #5 Psychology and Social Sciences ’ on the global science map of Section 3.3 . The reference with highest number of citations is [ 72 ], a book on risk communication aimed at decision-makers in government and industry, highlighting both the importance of procedure and content of risk messages. Other significant references are [ 73 ], a manual for industrial managers outlining a number of key rules for communicating with the public; [ 74 ], which outlines a mental model of how lay people respond to environmental hazards; and [ 75 ], which studies differences in lay and expert judgments of toxicological risks.

The third largest cluster is labeled ‘ γ Food Risk Communication ’, which includes 75 references with an average publication year of 2003 and a silhouette value of 0.867, indicating a reasonable separation of other research clusters. Its research front is [ 62 ], which describes the history of risk communication, summarizes theoretical avenues, and provides research directions in food-related risks. It highlights media amplification, public trust, and communication of uncertainty as essential ingredients. This cluster is associated with Cluster A (societal risk governance) of Section 3.5 , draws on mainly on journals from ‘ Psychology, Education, Social ’ journals on the global science map of Section 3.4 , and is based on the scientific categories ‘ #5 Psychology and Social Sciences ’ and ‘ #1 Biology and Medicine ’ on the global science map of Section 3.3 . The reference with highest number of citations in this cluster is [ 76 ], a highly influential book in risk research, focusing on the conceptual and methodological basis of risk perception and its implications. Other impactful references include [ 77 ], a book outlining the social amplification of risk framework, and [ 78 ], a book describing theory and applications of a mental models approach to risk communication. The last two highly impactful references in this cluster are [ 18 ], a review article describing the evolution of some major developments in risk communication in the period 1996–2005, and [ 79 ], a book outlining four risk management strategies (political regulatory process, public deliberation, the technocratic/scientific perspective, and strictly economics-based risk management) and risk management case studies in Germany, the USA, and Sweden.

The fourth largest cluster is ‘ δ Rational Public Discourse ’, which includes 69 references with an average publication year of 1988. Its silhouette value is 0.898, indicating a high degree of separation of other co-citation clusters. The research front of this cluster is [ 63 ], which discusses a communication process between stakeholders with conflicting interests from the viewpoint of message recognition, inducing attitude and behavior changes, and conflict resolution. This cluster is associated with Cluster A (societal risk governance) of Section 3.5 , is based on knowledge from journals related to ‘ Psychology, Education, Social ’ on the global science map of Section 3.4 , and is strongly rooted in the scientific category ‘ #5 Psychology and Social Sciences ’ on the global science map of Section 3.3 . The reference with the highest number of citations in this cluster is [ 80 ], an influential book on risk communication, introducing it as a technical and cultural phenomenon. Another influential reference is [ 81 ], a book outlining seven cardinal rules for effective risk communication in environmental risk management. The final two highly influential references in this cluster are [ 82 ], which introduces the social amplification of risk framework, and [ 83 ], which presents results of a study on risk communication in response to public concerns about geological radon health hazards.

The fifth largest co-citation cluster, spanning 61 references with an average publication year of 2001, is labeled ‘ ε General Practice Patient Involvement ’. It has a silhouette value of 0.835, indicating a relatively large overlap with other clusters. The research front of this cluster is [ 64 ], which presents results of a study on the use of risk communication for shared decision making in general practice. It is associated with Cluster B (medical risk communication) of Section 3.5 and involves knowledge from journals related to ‘ Health, Nursing, Medicine ’ and ‘ Psychology, Education, Social ’ on the global science map of Section 3.4 . It involves interdisciplinary scientific categories, bridging the scientific domains ‘ #1 Biology and Medicine ’ and ‘ #5 Psychology and Social Sciences ’ on the global science map of Section 3.3 . The most impactful reference in this cluster is [ 84 ], which studies how numerical information can be visually represented to support dialogue and risk communication in medicine. Other highly impactful references include [ 20 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 ], which concern various aspects of the visual communication of medical-related risks and the impacts on effectiveness of patient decision making. The references [ 89 , 90 ] address case studies of representation of risk information related to violence and cancer, whereas [ 91 , 92 ] address patient participation and teaching and learning in shared decision making.

The sixth largest research cluster spans 56 references with an average publication year of 2009 and is labeled ‘ ζ Flood Risk Communication ’. With a silhouette value of 0.852, it has a relatively large overlap with other clusters. The research front of this cluster is [ 65 ], which describes a best practices model for risk communication and management in environmental hazards related to floods. This cluster is associated with Cluster A (societal risk governance) of Section 3.5 , relies on journals focusing on ‘ Psychology, Education, Social ’ on the global science map of Section 3.4 , and bridges the scientific domains ‘ #5 Psychology and Social Sciences ’ and ‘ #3 Ecology and Environmental Science and Technology ’ on the global science map of Section 3.3 . The highest cited reference in this cluster is [ 93 ], which builds on an extensive body of risk communication literature to address four questions about risk communication, including how to communicate uncertainty, how declining trust can be handled, and what the lessons learned from earlier work can be used to define new principles for risk communication. Other influential work in this cluster includes [ 94 ], which addresses risk perception and communication in natural hazards; [ 95 , 96 ], which review perceptions on flood risks and associated flood mitigation behavior; and [ 97 ], a book outlining an earlier version of the risk governance framework by the International Risk Governance Council [ 11 ].

Finally, the seventh largest co-citation cluster is labeled ‘ η Epidemic and Bioterrorism ’. With 55 references and an average publication year of 1996, it is the last cluster with more than 50 references included. It has a silhouette value of 0.934, indicating a good separation from other co-citation clusters. Its research front is [ 66 ], which is a highly impactful article describing risk perceptions and communication strategies for release of a biohazard pathogen in an urban setting. This cluster is associated with Cluster A (societal risk governance) of Section 3.5 , relies on journals focusing on ‘ Psychology, Education, Social ’ and ‘ Health, Nursing, Medicine ’ on the global science map of Section 3.4 , and bridges the scientific domains ‘ #5 Psychology and Social Sciences ’ and ‘ #1 Biology and Medicine ’ on the global science map of Section 3.3 . The highest cited references in this cluster are [ 16 ], which describes the evolution of 20 years of risk perception and risk communication research; [ 98 ], which addresses the issue of various scales of risk as a challenge for risk communication; and [ 99 ], which presents an analytical–deliberative process for risk communication.

4. Discussion

4.1. interpretation of the results.

The analysis of research outputs in the risk communication research domain in Section 2.1 shows a fast accelerating growth, especially over the last two decades. While it is tempting to conclude that risk communication has become a more popular research topic, this development should be understood in light of general trends in academic publishing. It has been shown that publication rates have increased sharply across the entire scientific enterprise [ 100 ], and similar surges in publication rates have been observed in other risk-related scientometric analyses [ 33 , 35 , 41 ]. Hence, it is not entirely clear whether the increased risk communication research outputs are indeed indicative of its relative increased academic significance, whether these are the result of the increased relevance in societal governance or medical contexts, or whether the trends are caused by internal dynamics of academia.

Focusing on the geographical distribution of the research outputs shown in Section 3.2 , it is very clear that, for the time being, the domain is very strongly dominated by research originating from Western countries, with the United States of America being by far the largest contributor. Only some Western European countries also have significantly contributed to the domain, with other geographical regions displaying a much lower research output. The research impact shows a similar picture. There are, however, some signs that risk communication research is also gaining importance in non-Western countries, with research originating from, e.g., China, South Korea, and Brazil, being relatively sizeable, especially more recently. This may indicate that the Western dominance may decrease in the future and that new perspectives may enter the research domain.

The relative dearth of risk communication research in South American, Eastern European, African, Middle Eastern, Asian, and Oceanian countries/regions may be a reflection of the governance structures of those societies, because governance approaches and mechanisms are necessarily embedded in cultural, organizational, and political contexts [ 11 ]. In this context, it is noteworthy that risk communication processes, especially when related to societal governance, have been strongly linked to deliberative processes and hence often assume certain forms of democratic societies with a large role for public engagement and participation [ 101 ]. Nevertheless, informing the public in disaster or crisis situations, e.g., related to public health or natural hazards, is likely important irrespective of the political governance style.

The activity in the broad co-citation clusters of Section 3.6 and the research activity across scientific categories of Section 3.3 indicates that risk communication research follows general societal concerns: while health, medicine, and environmental issues are of continuous relevance, concerns about specific technologies such as nuclear power are more transitory. The recent focus on meteorology and atmospheric sciences and geosciences furthermore indicate a broad trend in increased focus on effects of climate change and natural disasters. These broad trends are also found in risk perception research [ 102 ], which is closely linked with risk communication as these are commonly discussed together, especially in a societal risk governance context [ 11 , 97 ].

The scientific category analysis of Section 3.3 and the journals’ distribution and intellectual basis analysis of Section 3.4 show that the risk communication body of knowledge is interdisciplinary. Typically, research relies on social science knowledge as a base field, which is linked to more domain-specific knowledge related to medical, environmental, technical, or physical hazards. The results of the co-citation analysis and research fronts described in Section 3.6 show that applied research in risk communication appears to follow large societal trends and topics of societal concern, including public health, nuclear power, epidemics, natural disasters, and food regulation.

The analysis of narrative patterns in Section 3.5 shows that there are two major clusters in terms: one related to societal risk governance and one addressing medical risk communication. These address largely different problems, in that the former focuses on communication between different societal stakeholders with possibly conflicting value systems and objectives, while the latter is concerned with interpersonal communication in a trust relationship between medical practitioner and patient (or family). The term analysis of Figure 6 , Figure 7 and Figure 8 and Table 7 show that these clusters are mostly disjoint. The results of the co-citation cluster results of Section 3.6 also show that medicine-related risk communication knowledge remains mostly in that broad subdomain of the research field, while application-specific knowledge related to other societal risks also is rather contained, as can be judged from the mostly very high silhouette values.

Finally, in the analysis of journal distribution in Section 3.4 , it is noteworthy that Risk Analysis and Journal of Risk Research , which have been identified as core journals in risk and safety research [ 103 ], concentrate a large body of work on risk communication, while also having a significant scientific impact in this domain. This can be seen to support arguments that risk research is not merely an interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary research activity, but that it has its own foundational basis of concepts, theories, models, and approaches, and that it hence could be seen as a research domain in its own right [ 67 ].

As noted by one of the reviewers of an earlier version of this manuscript, the answers found to the questions stated in the introduction are in line with what knowledgeable domain experts would expect. Through a data-driven approach, the results obtained in this work substantiate these intuitive expert insights, providing evidence for the stated research questions, while raising new questions and research directions, as outlined next.

4.2. Future Work

Based on the results of Section 3 as discussed in Section 4.1 , a number of avenues for future work can be identified, either to further develop the research domain of risk communication itself, or to better understand how it has developed as a domain of scientific activity.

Considering that risks are mediated and socially conveyed differently across varying cultural traditions [ 104 ], the lack of risk communication research in non-Western societies may result in a culturally biased approach. Hence, available theories, models, or conceptual frameworks for risk communication may need modification or elaboration to account for different social traditions, world views, or knowledge systems. More future research in non-Western countries may therefore lead to new fundamental insights and applications in the research domain.

Based on the findings that applied risk communication research focuses on issues of contemporary societal importance, there are various new directions for future risk communication research. Major global risks are one important line of work. Judging from The Global Risks Report 2020 [ 105 ] and considering that perceptions of importance of societal risks are usually mostly driven by the severity of potential impacts [ 106 ], such research could focus on climate action failure, weapons of mass destruction, biodiversity loss, extreme weather, water crises, information infrastructure breakdown, natural disasters, cyberattacks, human-made environmental disasters, and infectious diseases. Other topics for risk communication may concern new technological developments or consumer products. Risk communication research may be especially relevant where such technologies lead to concerns about human health or safety, in particular in contexts where uncertainty and ambiguity are societally important dimensions of risk. One example of this is the human health concerns related to the adoption of 5G wireless communication technology [ 107 ], about which conspiracy theories circulate on social media platforms, linking 5G technology to the COVID-19 pandemic [ 108 ]. Another example may be the industrial developments towards autonomous cars and maritime autonomous surface ships. Risk perceptions may be important factors in certain consumer or societal stakeholder groups to oppose the adoption of such new technologies [ 15 , 109 ]. Risk communication research can help to inform and interact with the public for such new developments.

Based on the finding that risk communication research related to societal risk governance issues and research in medical contexts are as yet largely separated areas of work, it may be fruitful for future research to identify links between certain themes within these subdomains. Such knowledge exchange can, for instance, lead to new conceptual, theoretical, or methodological approaches.

While scientometrics analyses are well suited to obtain high-level insights into a research domain in terms of its structure, patterns, and evolution, the existing scientometric techniques are ill-suited to detect research gaps, recent patterns, or research directions related to specific frameworks or approaches. Other review types, such as critical reviews, meta-analyses, or systematic reviews, are much more amenable to these goals (see [ 29 ]). Several such narrative reviews have already been published. Hence, the current work should be seen as complementary to those, aiming to achieve different aims.

Finally, further work can be directed to better understanding the development of the risk communication research domain. Example research questions in this line of work can include, for instance, how risk communication has impacted the disciplines it is associated with; what relationships between risk communication and anthropology exist and how knowledge of the latter may be used to advance the former especially when dealing with non-Western societies; to what extent and how risk communication research has influenced political science research and actual political decision making processes; and to what extent risk communication research has helped to expand risk research or establish it as an independent domain of scientific activity. Narrative reviews and other research methods are better suited for such more in-depth questions about the risk communication research domain than the scientometric analyses presented here. Nevertheless, the results of Section 3 may serve as a basis for directing such future research.

4.3. Limitations

As in any study, it is important to be aware of the limitations of the presented work. First, the analysis is conditional to the search strategy described in Section 2.1 . While a title-based search strategy is widely applied in broad research domains to ensure relevance of the identified documents, using other search terms; searching in title, abstract, and keywords; or using a database other than WOSCC may affect the articles which are found and hence the results. Finally, the language restriction to English language publications may also induce some blind spots in the analysis.

It is noted here that using other terms such as ‘crisis communication’, ‘emergency communication’, or ‘disaster communication’ will almost certainly lead to detecting other patterns and trends. While these themes clearly have a close relationship to risk communication, as evidenced, e.g., by the results of the terms analysis ( Section 3.5 ) or the co-citation clusters ( Section 3.6 ), the choice has been made in this article to restrict the search to ‘risk communication’. This is done for two reasons. First, including other terms blurs the scope of the domain of research which is intended to be covered, as it opens questions as to why then for instance ‘hazard communication’ or ‘safety communication’ are not included. The authors believe that a clearly delineated focus on risk communication is preferable from a conceptual and methodological point of view. The second reason relates to the meaning of the risk concept as it contrasts to other related terms such as those mentioned above. While there is no scientific agreement about what exactly ‘risk’ means, it is broadly agreed that this carries the notion of possible or uncertain future events [ 110 ]. Thus, it may be deduced that risk communication focuses primarily on informing and interacting about events which have not yet happened. In contrast, crisis, emergency, or disaster communication is more focused on providing information about events which have already occurred or are ongoing [ 111 ]. While this delineation is not exact due to linguistic ambiguities, risk communication for example relates more to stakeholder processes in preparedness planning for natural or technological disasters, while crisis communication would focus on what information to provide, when, and how, to affected people in an ongoing disaster. Follow-up research may explore the domains of research covered by the other mentioned search terms, from which more conclusive statements about their specific relationships can be made.

In the analyses involving temporal evolutions of geographical research productivity ( Section 3.2 ), active scientific categories ( Section 3.3 ), narrative patterns ( Section 3.5 ), and co-citation clusters ( Section 3.6 ), the average publication year is used as a metric. While averages may hide significant information about the shape of the distribution, e.g., its variance or skewness, averages are commonly used in scientometric research to obtain high-level insights into the development of a research domain [ 28 ].

A common criticism of scientometric analyses is the use of citation metrics such as total number of citations for determining impact and detecting patterns. As citations need time to accumulate, the reliance on number of citations may cause some important trends to be missed, especially in more recent research. This can be seen, e.g., in Table 4 , where some scientific categories with more recent average years of publication do not have very high average citation scores. This may be because of the actual lower impact in the academic community, but the measures are also confounded by the shorter time of citations to accumulate to this research. Furthermore, using citations as a proxy for significance of research contributions is controversial [ 112 , 113 ], e.g., because of the potential for manipulation and lack of consideration of why an article was cited. Consequently, the presented scientometric analysis should not be seen as an endorsement of the correctness, value, or effectiveness of the highlighted risk communication research works. Instead, the analyses should rather be understood as descriptive of the development of the field and the countries, scientific categories, journals, terms, and references which have jointly forged and shaped the research domain to what it currently is.

5. Conclusions

In this work, a scientometric analysis of the risk communication research literature has been presented, spanning the period from 1985 to 2019. Various scientometric methods and visualization tools are applied to determine temporal trends and geographical patterns, contributing scientific categories and domains, the distribution of contributing journals and the intellectual basis of the domain, narrative patterns, and the evolution of the research domain using co-citation clusters. The analyses provide unprecedented insights into the structure, patterns, and developments of the risk communication domain, leading to several avenues of future research. The following main key conclusions are drawn:

• (i) Risk communication research has grown exponentially, especially with a very significant increase since the early 2000s.
• (ii) The domain is dominated by Western science, primarily from the USA and Western European countries, with non-Western research however recently emerging.
• (iii) The research domain is highly interdisciplinary, where typically knowledge from ‘Psychology and Social Sciences’ is combined with application-specific knowledge, with the domains ‘ Biology and Medicine ’, and ‘ Ecology and Environmental Science and Technology ’ being the most prominent.
• (iv) The most important journals in the field are Risk Analysis and Journal of Risk Research , which may suggest that risk research can been seen as a scientific domain in its own right.
• (v) There are two main, largely disconnected, narrative clusters in risk communication research. The first cluster is that of communication between medical practitioners and patients, and the other cluster concerns stakeholder communication for societal risk governance. The dominant narratives in the former concern interventions, decision making, and various medical conditions, whereas the latter focuses on societal risks such as public health, food, floods, or disease outbreaks.
• (vi) Risk communication research originates from a practice-oriented need to communicate regarding industrial (environmental) contamination and public health. Most subsequent research clusters address particular medical issues or societal concerns, including nuclear power, epidemics, or natural disasters. Apart from such application-oriented work, there are also some clusters that address risk communication models or theories or that study risk communication effectiveness. Many clusters are quite disjoint. This indicates that knowledge exchange between application domains is not very significant, which may therefore be a fruitful direction for future scholarship.

Apart from providing insights into the structure and evolution of the research domain and leading to the formulation of several avenues for future research, the results are considered particularly useful for early career researchers who are relatively new to the very extensive domain of risk communication research. They can also assist experienced academics in navigating the fast-increasing volume of research, either for teaching or research purposes. The results can also be useful for journal editors, to position their journal in the wider body of scientific work or to identify hot topics, for instance, for deciding on opening a special journal issue on a certain topic.

Acknowledgments

The reviewers are grateful to the anonymous referees for the comments provided to improve the quality and presentation of this article.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.G., J.L., and G.R.; methodology, J.L. and F.G.; software, J.L.; validation, F.G. and G.R.; formal analysis, J.L. and F.G.; investigation, F.G., J.L., and G.R.; resources, F.G., J.L.; data curation, J.L. and F.G.; writing—original draft preparation, F.G. and J.L.; writing—review and editing, G.R.; visualization, J.L. and F.G.; project administration, F.G. and J.L.; funding acquisition, F.G. and J.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This study was supported by Canada Research Chairs Program, through a grant by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC). The contributions by the second author were supported through the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 51874042 and 51904185). The third author received no specific external funding for this research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

• Publizieren
• Über uns
• Lizenzbedingungen
•   KOBRA
• Fachbereiche
• FB 01 / Humanwissenschaften
• Institut für Psychologie
• Entwicklungspsychologie
• Dissertationen
• Dokumentanzeige

Öffnen

Risk communication during the covid-19 pandemic, zusammenfassung.

• 🇬🇧
• 🇩🇪

Zusätzliche Informationen

Förderhinweis, sammlung(en).

Die folgenden Lizenzbestimmungen sind mit dieser Ressource verbunden:

• Creative Commons Lizenz

Stöbern

• Subject List
• Take a Tour
• For Authors
• Subscriber Services
• Publications
• African American Studies
• African Studies
• American Literature
• Anthropology
• Architecture Planning and Preservation
• Art History
• Atlantic History
• Biblical Studies
• British and Irish Literature
• Childhood Studies
• Chinese Studies
• Cinema and Media Studies

Communication

• Criminology
• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law
• International Relations
• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History
• Political Science
• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation
• Social Work
• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Risk Communication

Introduction.

• Macro-level Dimensions
• Micro-level Dimensions
• Risk and Crisis Communication

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Accounting Communication
• Adherence and Communication
• Applied Communication Research Methods
• Cognitive Dissonance
• Crisis Communication
• Environmental Communication
• Health Communication
• Impression Management
• Information Processing
• Journalism and Trauma
• Message Characteristics and Persuasion
• Rumor and Communication
• Science Communication
• Selective Exposure

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Media Streaming
• Web3 and Communication
• Find more forthcoming titles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Risk Communication by Georg Ruhrmann , Lars Guenther LAST REVIEWED: 29 September 2014 LAST MODIFIED: 29 September 2014 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199756841-0156

Many natural disasters and industrial accidents are not unforeseen; in many cases, scientists and other experts have conducted analyses and communicated the potential risks in advance. When a disaster does occur, journalists and the media react immediately. Politicians and administrators, spurred by this media coverage, then begin to work to change laws and regulations. Finally, representatives from the business sector not only change production processes and products but also invest in new research and public relations: this is done to shape media coverage in the event of another accident or disaster and to inform the public and reach acceptance of risks and uncertainty. A theory of risk communication, however, is only beginning to develop. The term risk communication appeared for the first time in the mid-1980s, as an interdisciplinary field bringing together a wide array of disciplines: economics, sociology, psychology, and communication research ( Jungermann, et al. 1988 ; Lundgreen and McKaien 2013 , cited under Communication about Risks ). Analyses dealing with risk communication describe and explain (1) what persons communicate in what ways about risks, (2) how the mass media covers risks, and (3) what influences the way the general public receives, understands, and uses risk-related information. Based in the United States and beginning in the late 1960s—and supported by several major industrial accidents (e.g., the Bhopal gas leak and the Chernobyl [see Chernousenko 1991 ] and the Three Mile Island nuclear meltdowns)—a scientific and political controversy was ignited. Key issues were (1) how experts perceive and assess risks; (2) how journalists, the media, and the general public perceive and evaluate risks based on expert opinion; and (3) if a dialogue between experts and non-experts would result in more acceptance toward the undesirable but inevitable consequences of risks. Risk communication research explores the general public’s concerns regarding important scientific findings, technological innovations, and their social consequences, as well as the skepticism of experts, journalists, and information recipients toward uncertain consequences of technological innovations. These forces can be seen both in media coverage about science and in public-relations materials. Risk communication research emphasizes that basic research and innovations are associated with risks but that these risks are necessary to increase wealth and knowledge.

Since the early 1980s, psychologists and sociologists have been major contributors to the scientific foundations of a theory of risk communication. Beck 1992 , Douglas and Wildavsky 1983 , and Rasborg 2012 combine cultural-sociological and theoretical approaches, Luhmann 2005 provides systems-theoretical considerations, and with Perrow 1984 can be seen a tradition of an organizational-sociological approach. From the very beginning of risk communication research, there has been a general distinction between analytically oriented theoretical and empirical basic research and normatively oriented applied research. In the late 1980s, especially in the United States, both public and private agencies and policy organizations developed, focusing on normatively oriented applied research. Early discussion was guided by the influential report made by US National Research Council Committee on Risk Perception and Communication 1989 ; this report broadly discussed the interdisciplinary bases of fundamental processes of risk perception, risk communication, and risk. Renn 2008 summarizes twenty years of risk communication research in this area. See also Lundgreen and McKaien 2013 , cited under Communication about Risks , which presents both basic theoretical underpinnings and relevant applications of risk communication. Special attention is given to planning, conception, implementation, and evaluation of effective risk communication. Prominent examples include the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami, the 2010 BP oil spill, and the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster.

Beck, Ulrich. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity . London and New Delhi: SAGE.

Ulrich Beck, a leading contemporary sociologist, focuses on the basic concepts underlying trends in modern societies toward individualization or institutionalization. Beck discusses socioeconomic inequality and political theories of knowledge (keyword “concurrence of rationalities”).

Chernousenko, Vladimir M. 1991. Chernobyl: Insight from the Inside . Berlin: Springer.

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-76453-0

This piece, written by the Scientific Director of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences, is one of the first instructive and critical descriptions and explanations of the explosion that took place at Block 4 of the Chernobyl nuclear power station.

Douglas, Mary, and Aaron Wildavsky. 1983. Risk and culture: An essay on the selection of technological and environmental dangers . Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.

This influential theoretical work on risk and culture deals with sociologically relevant dimensions of problems and risks. These problems arise analytically from a matrix of certain and uncertain technical and scientific knowledge, as well as from points of agreement and dissent in the field of risk communication.

Jungermann, Helmut, Roger E. Kasperson, and Peter M. Wiedemann, eds. 1988. Risk communication . Jülich, Germany: Kernforschungsanlage Jülich.

One of the first books published in Germany about risk communication. It concentrates on the media’s reporting of risk information, trust and credibility in risk communication, the right to know, community dynamics, disaster and crisis communication, and conceptual frames for describing the public perception of risk.

Luhmann, Niklas. 2005. Risk: A sociological theory . New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.

This highly influential sociological, systems-theoretical monograph defines risks in relation to hazards, whereby a risk is the unexpected and harmful unforeseen result of a decision. Luhmann demonstrates how different autonomous sub-systems of modern society (e.g., economy, politics, culture, and science) deal with specific forms of risks.

Perrow, Charles. 1984. Normal accidents: Living with high-risk technologies . New York: Basic Books.

This Yale University sociologist analyzes the organization of unforeseen possible risks of technological systems ranging from nuclear power plants to chemical factories, as well as in fields such as general genetic research. Perrow argues that these risks can be traced back to the systematic properties of large-scale systems.

Rasborg, Klaus. 2012. “(World) risk society” or “new rationalities of risk”? A critical discussion of Ulrich Beck’s theory of reflexive modernity. Thesis Eleven 108:3–25.

DOI: 10.1177/0725513611421479

Deals with relevant contradictions of the risk society, respectively the reflexive modernization. While Beck mainly discusses social constructivist and technologically driven realist notions of risks based on the sociology of knowledge, Rasborg calls for analyses of the changing cultural self-understanding of late modern society, referred to as new “semantic of crisis.”

Renn, Ortwin. 2008. Risk governance: Coping with Uncertainty in a complex world . London: Earthscan.

Based on extensive insight into research on risks, Renn provides an extensive overview of the principles and conditions of risk communication. He also focuses on the criteria and guidelines for effective risk communication.

US National Research Council Committee on Risk Perception and Communication. 1989. Improving risk communication . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

This report was compiled by a committee of authorities in this field, including B. Fishoff, N. Schudson, P. Tannebaum, and D. von Winterfeldt. It provides an excellent and comprehensive overview of the origins of the psychological, natural scientific, and sociological basic research in risk communication, risk perception, and risk communication.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About Communication »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• Acculturation Processes and Communication
• Action Assembly Theory
• Action-Implicative Discourse Analysis
• Activist Media
• Adolescence and the Media
• Advertisements, Televised Political
• Advertising
• Advertising, Children and
• Advertising, International
• Advocacy Journalism
• Agenda Setting
• Annenberg, Walter H.
• Apologies and Accounts
• Argumentation
• Artificial Intelligence (AI) Advertising
• Attitude-Behavior Consistency
• Audience Fragmentation
• Audience Studies
• Authoritarian Societies, Journalism in
• Bakhtin, Mikhail
• Bandwagon Effect
• Baudrillard, Jean
• Blockchain and Communication
• Bourdieu, Pierre
• Brand Equity
• British and Irish Magazine, History of the
• Broadcasting, Public Service
• Capture, Media
• Castells, Manuel
• Celebrity and Public Persona
• Civil Rights Movement and the Media, The
• Co-Cultural Theory and Communication
• Codes and Cultural Discourse Analysis
• Collective Memory, Communication and
• Comedic News
• Communication Apprehension
• Communication Campaigns
• Communication, Definitions and Concepts of
• Communication History
• Communication Law
• Communication Management
• Communication Networks
• Communication, Philosophy of
• Community Attachment
• Community Journalism
• Community Structure Approach
• Computational Journalism
• Computer-Mediated Communication
• Content Analysis
• Corporate Social Responsibility and Communication
• Critical and Cultural Studies
• Critical Race Theory and Communication
• Cross-tools and Cross-media Effects
• Cultivation
• Cultural and Creative Industries
• Cultural Imperialism Theories
• Cultural Mapping
• Cultural Persuadables
• Cultural Pluralism and Communication
• Cyberpolitics
• Death, Dying, and Communication
• Debates, Televised
• Deliberation
• Developmental Communication
• Diffusion of Innovations
• Digital Divide
• Digital Gender Diversity
• Digital Intimacies
• Digital Literacy
• Diplomacy, Public
• Distributed Work, Comunication and
• Documentary and Communication
• E-democracy/E-participation
• E-Government
• Elaboration Likelihood Model
• Electronic Word-of-Mouth (eWOM)
• Embedded Coverage
• Entertainment
• Entertainment-Education
• Ethnic Media
• Ethnography of Communication
• Experiments
• Families, Multicultural
• Family Communication
• Federal Communications Commission
• Feminist and Queer Game Studies
• Feminist Data Studies
• Feminist Journalism
• Feminist Theory
• Focus Groups
• Food Studies and Communication
• Freedom of the Press
• Friendships, Intercultural
• Gatekeeping
• Gender and the Media
• Global Englishes
• Global Media, History of
• Global Media Organizations
• Glocalization
• Goffman, Erving
• Habermas, Jürgen
• Habituation and Communication
• Hermeneutic Communication Studies
• Homelessness and Communication
• Hook-Up and Dating Apps
• Hostile Media Effect
• Identification with Media Characters
• Identity, Cultural
• Image Repair Theory
• Implicit Measurement
• Infographics
• Information and Communication Technology for Development
• Information Management
• Information Overload
• Infotainment
• Innis, Harold
• Instructional Communication
• Integrated Marketing Communications
• Interactivity
• Intercultural Capital
• Intercultural Communication
• Intercultural Communication, Tourism and
• Intercultural Communication, Worldview in
• Intercultural Competence
• Intercultural Conflict Mediation
• Intercultural Dialogue
• Intercultural New Media
• Intergenerational Communication
• Intergroup Communication
• International Communications
• Interpersonal Communication
• Interpersonal LGBTQ Communication
• Interpretation/Reception
• Interpretive Communities
• Journalism, Accuracy in
• Journalism, Alternative
• Journalism, Citizen
• Journalism, Citizen, History of
• Journalism Ethics
• Journalism, Interpretive
• Journalism, Peace
• Journalism, Tabloid
• Journalists, Violence against
• Knowledge Gap
• Lazarsfeld, Paul
• Leadership and Communication
• LGBTQ+ Family Communication
• Mass Communication
• McLuhan, Marshall
• Media Activism
• Media Aesthetics
• Media and Time
• Media Convergence
• Media Credibility
• Media Dependency
• Media Ecology
• Media Economics
• Media Economics, Theories of
• Media, Educational
• Media Effects
• Media Ethics
• Media Events
• Media Exposure Measurement
• Media, Gays and Lesbians in the
• Media Literacy
• Media Logic
• Media Management
• Media Policy and Governance
• Media Regulation
• Media, Social
• Media Sociology
• Media Systems Theory
• Merton, Robert K.
• Mobile Communication Studies
• Multimodal Discourse Analysis, Approaches to
• Multinational Organizations, Communication and Culture in
• Murdoch, Rupert
• Narrative Engagement
• Narrative Persuasion
• Net Neutrality
• News Framing
• News Media Coverage of Women
• NGOs, Communication and
• Online Campaigning
• Open Access
• Organizational Change and Organizational Change Communicat...
• Organizational Communication
• Organizational Communication, Aging and
• Parasocial Theory in Communication
• Participation, Civic/Political
• Participatory Action Research
• Patient-Provider Communication
• Peacebuilding and Communication
• Perceived Realism
• Personalized Communication
• Persuasion and Social Influence
• Persuasion, Resisting
• Photojournalism
• Political Advertising
• Political Communication, Normative Analysis of
• Political Economy
• Political Knowledge
• Political Marketing
• Political Scandals
• Political Socialization
• Polls, Opinion
• Product Placement
• Public Interest Communication
• Public Opinion
• Public Relations
• Public Sphere
• Queer Intercultural Communication
• Queer Migration and Digital Media
• Race and Communication
• Racism and Communication
• Radio Studies
• Reality Television
• Reasoned Action Frameworks
• Religion and the Media
• Reporting, Investigative
• Rhetoric and Communication
• Rhetoric and Intercultural Communication
• Rhetoric and Social Movements
• Rhetoric, Religious
• Rhetoric, Visual
• Risk Communication
• Schramm, Wilbur
• Scripps, E. W.
• Sense-Making/Sensemaking
• Sesame Street
• Sex in the Media
• Small-Group Communication
• Social Capital
• Social Change
• Social Cognition
• Social Construction
• Social Identity Theory and Communication
• Social Interaction
• Social Movements
• Social Network Analysis
• Social Protest
• Sports Communication
• Stereotypes
• Strategic Communication
• Superdiversity
• Surveillance and Communication
• Symbolic Interactionism in Communication
• Synchrony in Intercultural Communication
• Tabloidization
• Telecommunications History/Policy
• Television, Cable
• Textual Analysis and Communication
• Third Culture Kids
• Third-Person Effect
• Time Warner
• Transgender Media Studies
• Transmedia Storytelling
• Two-Step Flow
• United Nations and Communication
• Urban Communication
• Uses and Gratifications
• Video Deficit
• Video Games and Communication
• Violence in the Media
• Virtual Reality and Communication
• Visual Communication
• Web Archiving
• Whistleblowing
• Whiteness Theory in Intercultural Communication
• Youth and Media
• Zines and Communication
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [185.80.151.41]
• 185.80.151.41

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 24 November 2023

Disaster risk communication requires dissemination, dialogue and participation

• I. S. Stewart   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9746-8667 1 ,
• E. Sevilla   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7268-8973 2 ,
• K. Barragán 2 &
• E. Yahya Menteşe 3  

Nature Reviews Earth & Environment volume  4 ,  pages 805–806 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

369 Accesses

1 Citations

6 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Developing world
• Natural hazards

Disaster risk communication traditionally focuses on authorities conveying hazard and risk information to at-risk populations, with little consideration of local community knowledge. To enable risk reduction and resilience, disaster management must forge partnerships with local communities and empower citizen-led initiatives.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

92,52 € per year

only 7,71 € per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on SpringerLink
• Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fakhruddin, B., Clark, H., Robinson, L. & Hieber-Girardet, L. Should I stay or should I go now? Why risk communication is the critical component in disaster risk reduction. Prog. Disaster Sci. 8 , 100139 (2020).

Article   Google Scholar  

Lejano, R. P., Haque, C. E. & Berkes, F. Co-production of risk knowledge and improvement of risk communication: A three-legged stool. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 64 , 102508 (2021).

Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. In UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015).

Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2022: Our World at Risk: Transforming Governance for a Resilient Future (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, 2022).

Donovan, A. R., Borie, M. A. H. & Blackburn, S. E. Changing the paradigm for risk communication: integrating sciences to understand cultures. In Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction (GAR 2019) (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, 2019).

Alexander, D. E. Communicating earthquake risk to the public: the trial of the “L’Aquila Seven”. Nat. Hazards 72 , 1159–1173 (2014).

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Committee on the Science of Science Communication. Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda (National Academies Press, 2017).

Meyer, R. & Kunreuther, H. The Ostrich Paradox: Why we Underprepare for Disasters (Univ. Pennsylvania Press, 2017).

Hicks, A. et al. Global mapping of citizen science projects for disaster risk reduction. Front. Earth Sci. 7 , 226 (2019).

Cremen, G. et al. A state-of-the-art decision-support environment for risk-sensitive and pro-poor urban planning and design in Tomorrow’s cities. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 85 , 103400 (2023).

Sevilla, E. et al. Envisioning the future by learning from the past: Arts and humanities in interdisciplinary tools for promoting a culture of risk. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 92 , 103712 (2023).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge funding from UKRI GCRF under grant NE/S009000/1, Tomorrow’s Cities Hub.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Royal Scientific Society, Amman, Jordan

I. S. Stewart

College of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador

E. Sevilla & K. Barragán

Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute, Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey

E. Yahya Menteşe

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

I.S.S. prepared an initial draft manuscript and all authors contributed equally to its revision. All authors contributed to and approved the submitted version. I.S.S. conceived and K.B. designed and drafted the artwork.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. S. Stewart .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Stewart, I.S., Sevilla, E., Barragán, K. et al. Disaster risk communication requires dissemination, dialogue and participation. Nat Rev Earth Environ 4 , 805–806 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00506-w

Download citation

Published : 24 November 2023

Issue Date : December 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00506-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

/images/cornell/logo35pt_cornell_white.svg" alt="risk communication dissertation"> Cornell University --> Graduate School

Risk analysis, communication and policy, field description.

This minor field integrates a number of approaches from the natural and social sciences to cope with decision making under uncertainty, especially for the environment. It complements disciplinary efforts ranging from engineering (infrastructure safety, decision theory, waste management) to life sciences (toxicology, food and water safety, resource conservation, invasive species/pest management). Quantitative and qualitative methods from the sciences are used not only in assessing risks but also in communicating them between affected parties and in the development of stewardship and public policies. Students must be admitted into a major field (not restricted by the minor), select one of the field members as a minor member for their committee, and then complete basic courses in risk analysis (requires some background in calculus and statistics) or ecological risk assessment, risk communication, public policy, and a seminar in risk issues. The foregoing applicable courses may come from the student's major or other minors, to expedite and focus this effort in some area of thesis research.

Contact Information

Hollister Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY  14853

Subject and Degrees

Concentrations by subject, risk analysis, communication,and policy.

• risk analysis, communication and policy (minor)

Evan G Cooch

• Campus: Ithaca
• Concentrations: Risk Analysis, Communication,and Policy: risk analysis, communication and policy

Yrjo Tapio Grohn

Rui Hai Liu

Hussni Omar Mohammed

Linda K Nozick

Patrick M. Reed

• Research Interests: decision analytics, sustainability science, risk management

David Ruppert

William D Schulze

Sharon Tennyson

• Research Interests: policy analysis and management

Narrow Your Search

Return to Field of Study listing

Clear Filters

Table of Contents

• Risk Communication and Crisis Journalism

The pathway focuses on the ways media and public, private, or non-governmental organizations communicate about present, emerging, and evolving risks. Combining the methodical engagement with the rich theoretical and case study research literature with a hands-on coverage of current crises and emergencies, the pathway explores the best practices in dealing with peace and war, environment, science, and public health, through strategic communication and crisis management methods to confront disinformation and hate speech.

Learning Objectives

• Awareness of the significance of risk communication in contemporary global society
• Ability to match appropriate form of risk communication to type of risk
• Appreciation of the challenges and parameters of independent reporting in the diverse field of risk/crisis journalism
• Acquisition of key investigative, analytical and reporting skills regarding the covering of crises/risks/emergencies issues from an independent, scrupulous and socially responsible point of view.

Program Details

Digital Media, Communication and Journalism is a full-time (90 ECTS) English language Master’s program, the first of its kind among Greek public Universities. Designed to combine practice-based learning with sustained theoretical reflection, the intensive 12 months post-graduate program includes two course semesters and a third one, dedicated to the research and writing of a Thesis.

Program Structure

The structure of the program has been designed with a view to combine in-depth specialization with students’ freedom to select a set of courses that best matches their research and professional interests.

For the successful completion of each pathway students must:

• Take the core course of the preferred pathway
• Select at least 3 electives offered in the preferred pathway
• Select up to 2 electives offered by the other two pathways
• Complete a dissertation on a topic related to the subject areas covered by the preferred pathway.

Core Course

Ric 301 | risk communication.

Course Description The course presents the full array of major risks facing humanity universally and concerning both nature and social organization: environmental sustainability, public health, extreme inequality / poverty, migrations. Seen both from the political economy and communications perspective such challenges are examined through the lens of how usefully they are reported about. Key professional practice issues arise concerning whether severe risks and challenges should be mediated alternatively. ‘Risk Communication’ elucidates such options, discussing the need for ‘proactive journalism’, fostering conscious and conscientious actors: i.e. policy-makers and citizens who contribute to sustainable natural and socio-economic environment. Course Objectives Familiarize with concepts of ‘environmental risk’, ‘social crises’, ‘global public goods’ Distinguish diverse categories of interlinked risks and challenges Grasp consequential irreversible impact of environmental risks / crises on large populations Elaborate with notions of ‘normative journalism’ for global awareness and rescue Come to terms with non-partisan, activist types of journalism. Learning Outcomes Identify environmental risks and their concrete impact on society Capacity to analyze risks critically from a multi-stakeholder perspective Ability to compare risks and stakes between competing interests of various kinds, while considering and defending the ‘public interest’ Construct proactive journalism methods: defending ‘global public goods’ and the universal common interest Approach humanity’s welfare risks beyond borders or nationalistic scope  Class/Learning activities Lectures, workshops, in situ study-visits, group simulation workshops, in-class presentations, literature study, written assignments. Workload Type of work Description Hours Lectures Thirteen 3-hours lectures 39 Simulation of roles in group work Coordination of role play-acting and group work 20-25 Independent study Study of required and optional literature 40-45 Research Off- and Online research 35-40 Written assignments-Presentations Written assignments in-class oral presetantion and defense of main assignment submitting of the written essay of 3000 words (plus/minus 500) 120-140 Total workload 254-289  Assessment Type of assessment Learning outcome Impact on final grade Date of assessment Participation in group work and discussion 1-5 20% Regularly Preliminary Oral Presentation (of written) assignment 1-5 20% 8th-12th week Simulating of Roles workshops 3-4 20% 5th-8th week Submit written assignment (essay) 1-5 40% 14th week  Required Reading Beck Ulrich, (1991), ‘Risk Society’, Cambridge, Polity Press, Beck Ulrich, (2007), ‘World at Risk’, Cambridge, Polity Press in Maxwell R. et al. ‘Media and the Ecological Crisis’, (eds), New York, Routledge Kaul, Inge, Isabelle Grunberg & Mark A.Stern, (eds), (1999) ‘Global Public Goods’, Oxford University Press, Oxford Maxwell Richard, Jon Raundalen, Nina Lager Vestberg, (2014), ‘Media and the Ecological Crisis’, (eds), New York, Routledge Sophia Kaitatzi-Whitlock, (2014), ‘E-waste, Human Waste, Infoflation’, Stig A. Nohrstedt (ed), (2010), ‘Communicating Risks: Towards the Threat Society?’, Gothenburg, NORDICOM   Additional Essay-supporting Reading List Beck Ulrich, (1988), ‘What Is Globalization?’ Polity Press, Cambridge Crenson A. Matthew (1971), ‘The Unpolitics of Air Pollution’, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore & London European Union, Commission, (2008), ‘A sustainable Future in Our Hands: guide to the EU’s sustainable development strategy’, CEC, Luxembourg George Soros, (1998), ‘The Crisis of Global Capitalism: Open Society Endangered’, New York, Public Affairs Gorz Andre, (1980), ‘Ecology as Politics’, South End Press, Boston Habermas Jurgen, (2003), ‘The Future of Human Nature’, Cambridge, Polity Löfstedt Ragnar & Boholm Åsa, (2009), ‘Risk’, (eds), London, EarthScan Publishing Martin Rees, (2003), ‘Our Final Century: will the human race survive the twenty-first century?’, London, Heinemann Naomi Klein, (2008), ‘The Shock Doctrine’; Toronto, Random House Limited Ralston Saul John (1995), ‘The Unconscious Civilization’ , New York, Free Press

MCC 400 | Communication Research Methods

Course Description This unit covers in detail the practice of research methods in the field of communication. Students will become familiar with developing the research question(s), formulating the research questions and hypotheses of their study, selecting participants and instruments. Moreover, they will explore the various designs that are used in quantitative (e.g. experimental and quasi experimental design, correlational design, surveys) and qualitative (e.g. interviews, focus groups) research. During these sessions students will learn how to select the appropriate research design depending on the area they wish to study and the analysis that is required for each set of data (quantitative or qualitative). A great emphasis is also given to the ethical issues in research methods. Course Objectives Understand the issues involved in the design of research in the field of communication Understand the strengths and weaknesses of each research methodology Formulate a clear research question and be able to write a research proposal Select the appropriate research technique to answer specific research questions in the field of communication Communicate and disseminate the research output Learning Outcomes After successful completion of the course students will be able: To perform effective literature search Το adopt a critical approach to existing scientific knowledge To set the appropriate goal and research questions To justify their methodological choices Το apply a variety of research designs To design a realistic research proposal Class/Learning activities Lectures, workshops, group work, in-class presentations, literature study, written assignments Workload Type of work Description Hours Lectures Thirteen 3-hours lectures 39 Independent study Study of compulsory and optional literature 30-40 Article Presentation Locate and present an article during class 25-30 Labs Develop, submit and present the materials required for each of the three labs 50-60 Research Proposal 3.000 words written assignment 90-100 Total workload 239-269 Assessment Type of assessment Learning outcome Impact on final grade Date of assessment Participation in-class discussion 2-5 10% Regularly Lab Presentations 1-4 20% 5th, 9th, 13th week Article Presentations 1-2 10% Regularly Research proposal 5-6 60% 15th week Required Reading Wimmer, R. D., & Dominic, J. R. (2013). Mass media research: An introduction (10 th ed). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Publishing Additional Recommended Reading Babbie, E. (2013). The basics of social research (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning. Baxter, L., & Babbie, E. (2004). The basics of communication research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning Berger, A. (2019). Media and communication research methods: An introduction to qualitative and quantitative approaches (5 th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approach (5th ed.). Thousand Oak: CA, Sage. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4rth ed.). Thousand Oak: CA, Sage Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2017). Qualitative communication research methods (4rth ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Merrigan, G., & Huston, C. L. (2019). Communication research methods (4rth ed.). Oxford University. Mertens, D. M. (2015). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (4rth ed.). Thousand Oak: CA, Sage. Silverman, D. (2018). Doing qualitative research (4rth ed.). London: Sage.

MCC 402 | Qualitative Research Methods in Communication

Course description The course aims to introduce students to the conceptualization, design, and difficulties of qualitative research methods used in media and communication studies, including participant observation and digital ethnography, depth interviews, focus groups, historical analysis, discourse, thematic, visual and content analysis. Course objectives Develop an attitude of exploring inquiries, innovation and creativity, concerning the fields of journalism and popular culture Develop critical thinking skills to assess ideas, acquiring research skills, synthesizing knowledge across disciplines and applying academic knowledge to personal experiences throughout the media world. Develop research abilities through implementing qualitative methodological tools for investigating either the production/content of mediated messages or the audience responses to them. Learning outcomes Familiarize with the logic, design, and pitfalls of qualitative research in media and communication Apply general principles of qualitative analysis to accomplish and evaluate research in media and communication Associate major techniques of qualitative analysis to concrete research topics of interest. Class/Learning activities Lectures, group work, in-class presentations, literature study, written assignments.

RIC 307 | Reporting War & Crises

Course Description Covering crisis presents some of the biggest challenges in todays media. This course examines how the international broadcast, print and Web news media cover wars and other humanitarian crises. The course aims to introduce the students to the techniques of journalism in reporting war& crises and offer the necessary conceptual and practical tools to understand the rapid changes in the field. Course Objectives Familiarize students with the historical background of how war has been reported;  Examine the character and quality of information reported in time of war;  Examine how emerging communication technologies change war reporting and publishing; To develop an understanding the dynamic nature of today’s international news. To develop an understanding of how shifting parameters of the news business are affecting foreign news coverage. To identify how journalists function in a crises environment to gather and get out the news. To identify the various state and non-state actors and their roles in a crisis.  Learning Outcomes Identify and articulate journalism’s guiding principles in an international setting and in hostile environments.  Develop research and critical thinking competencies that allows for greater in depth understanding of global crises. To research, to experiment, and to be creative and construct meaning related to international newsgathering and dissemination. Class/Learning activities Through readings, class discussion, films, lecture, case studies, and individual analyses, the course will help students construct an understanding of the culture and the reporting of war & crises and especially the dynamic interaction in war & crises areas among news producers, relief organizations, policymakers, the public and those directly affected by wars & crisis.  Workload Type of work Description Hours Lectures Thirteen 3-hours lectures 39 Group work Organization and coordination of group work 20 Independent study Study of compulsory and optional literature 30-35 Simulation Excersices Simulation Excersices 40-45 Written assignments-Presentations Written assignments Three essays (2.500-3.000 words) Case studies presetations 120-140 Total workload 249-279  Assessment Type of assessment Learning outcome Impact on final grade Date of assessment Participation in Simulation Excersice 3-4 40% 10 th -11th week Presentation of case study 1-2 20% 3th-12th week Written assignments (essays) 3-4 40% 4th-14th week  Required Reading Stuart Allan and Barbie Zelizer, editors, Reporting War: Journalism in Wartime (London : Routledge, 2004). John Byrne Cook, Reporting the War: Freedom of the Press from the American Revolution to the War on Terrorism ( New York : Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), Michael Isikoff and David Corn, Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War ( New York : Three Rivers Press, 2007), 978-0-307-34682-7. Philip Knightley, The First Casualty: The War Correspondent as Hero and Myth Maker from the Crimea to Iraq (London/Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2004), 978-0801880308. Hoskins, A., & O’Loughlin, B. (2018) War and media the emergence of diffused war

RIC 305 | Mass Communication and Public Health

Course Description The course provides an overview to health communication research. Its primary goal is to discuss how communication can change health risk behaviors. It has a theoretical and a practical focus. Theoretically, it employs a psychological perspective by focusing on the psychological processes underlying the formation and change of health-related attitudes and behaviors. Theories are conceived as the essential tools we use to implement successful communication campaigns. Practically, the course employs an empirical approach to evaluation of health communication: students will design an empirical study, collect and analyze data, and write up a paper on a health communication issue, which, unavoidably this year, will be the COVID-19 pandemic. Course Objectives Understand the concepts and theories of health communication. Understand the processes through which media affect health behaviors Understand the design of health campaigns Understand the obstacles that health campaigns face  Learning Outcomes Define core concepts and theories of health communication. Identify different kinds of health communication effects. Explain the processes underlying health communication effects. Analyze and synthesize relevant research Write about health communication campaigns. Class/Learning activities Lectures, group work, in-class presentations, independent study, written assignments.  Workload Type of work Description Hours Lectures Thirteen 3-hours lectures 39 Independent study Study of class materials and readings 40-50 Readings presentation Presenting and leading a discussion on three relative topics 45-60 In-class presentation Conference type presentation of final paper 10-20 Final paper Design of a health communication campaign (3.000-3.500 words) 110-120 Total workload 244-289  Assessment Type of assessment Learning outcome Impact on final grade Date of assessment Participation in group discussion 1-2 10% On a regular basis Reading presentation 1-3 30% (3X10%) On a regular basis Presentation 1-4 10% 12th week Written assignment (final paper) 3-5 50% 13th week Required Reading Hornik, R. (Ed.). (2002). Public health communication: Evidence for behavior change. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Rice, R. E., & Atkin, C. K. (Eds.). (2013). Public communication campaigns (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. National Cancer Institute. (2001). Making health communication programs work. Available online at: http://www.cancer.gov/pinkbook Suggested Reading Crano, W. D., & Burgoon, M. (Eds.) (2002). Mass media and drug prevention: Classic and contemporary theories and research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.). (2004). Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. McKenzie, J. F., Neiger, B. L., & Smeltzer, J. L. (2005). Planning, implementing & evaluating health promotion programs (4th Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pearson. Thompson, T. L., Parrott, R., & Nussbaum, J.F. (Eds.) (2011). The Routledge handbook of health communication. Mahwah, NJ: Routledge. Witte, K., Meyer, G., & Martell, D. P. (2001). Effective health risk messages: A step-by-step guide. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

RIC 303 | Environmental Journalism

Course Description The course aims to examine main ecological issues in Greece. The purpose of this course is to teach students how report and write articles effectively about environmental issues and review topics of scientific importance of the area. Senior journalists and environmental experts are guest speakers. Students, also, go on field trips and have in-class discussion with representatives of ecological organizations and other environmental experts. They can also visit ecological food and wine producers and small agrotοurism enterprises. The core of the class consists of environmental news stories that students should prepare. Course Objectives Understanding of the concept and the practices of environmental journalism. Awareness of the meaning of the environmental issues in our world. Understand the main scientific definitions for the environment. Understand the new aspects of ecological crises. Learning Outcomes Analyze critically the ecological issues in modern world Define the core concepts of environmental journalism Write articles following professional standards for style, structure and information- gathering Build on information-gathering with interviews with environmental experts Class/Learning activities Lectures, workshops, in-class presentations, literature study, written assignments, environmental trips. Workload Type of work Description Hours Lectures Thirteen 3-hours lectures 39 Environmental trips Trips in agrotourism enterprises 15-20 Independent study Study of compulsory and optional literature 40-45 Research Online research 35-40 Written assignments-Presentations Written assignments one short assignment (600-800 words) essay (4.000-4.500 words) in-class presetations 120-140 Total workload 249-284 Assessment Type of assessment Learning outcome Impact on final grade Date of assessment Presentation of written assignment 1-2 20% 8th-12th week Written assignment (short) 3-4 30% 5th-8th week Written assignment (essay) 1-4 50% 14th week Required Reading Annin, P., The great lakes water wars. Island Press, N.Y., 2006. Corbett, J., Communicating Nature. How we create and understand Environmental Messages. Island Press, N.Y., 2006. Friedman, T., Hot, fat and crowed: Why the World needs a green revolution-and how we can renew our global future. Penguin Books Ltd, UK, 2008.

RIC 302 | Peace Journalism

Course Description The course seeks to introduce students to the conceptσ of peace, conflict and violence, and analyze the role that media/journalists can play in conflict resolution and peace-building. Through a number of case studies, it examines how journalism can create opportunities to consider and value non-violent responses to conflict. In so doing, not only does it compare war journalism (the dominant paradigm, which generates a simplistic perception of significant events) to peace journalism (an alternative approach), but also examines techniques on how the reporting of war and violence (direct, structural, cultural) can be made more accurate and more useful by seeking the roots of conflict and highlighting possible solutions. Course Objectives Analyze the concepts of peace, violence and conflict. Understand the concept, main theory and practice of peace journalism. Analyze the differences between traditional/confrontational journalism and peace journalism. Examine the importance of conflict resolution in peace journalism. Examine the dilemmas and obstacles of peace journalism (individual, structural and ideological). Learning Outcomes Upon successful completion of this course, students will be able to: Critically understand the mainstream media coverage of conflict Define the core concepts of peace journalism Understand how peace journalism can contribute to conflict resolution Positively affect the peace-building process and mitigate conflict through reporting, Offer alternative approaches to negative stereotypes through reporting, Help the audience/citizens understand the deeper and underlying causes of conflicts, what proposals and ideas exist for their resolution. Class/Learning activities Lectures, workshops, in-class presentations, literature study, written assignments. Workload Type of work Description Hours Lectures 10 3-hours lectures 30 Independent Study Study of compulsory and optional literature 50 Exercises in class Number and content of exercises to be discussed and arranged with the instructors 100 Written assignments-Presentations To be discussed and arranged with the instructors 120 Total workload 300 Assessment Type of assessment Learning outcome Impact on final grade Date of assessment Written assignment 1-6 60% 13th-15th week Representations 1-6 20% 11th– 13th week Exercises 1-6 20% Regularly Bibliography – Required Reading Wolfsfeld, Gadi (2004), Media and the Path to Peace, (Cambridge University Press) Spencer, Graham (2005), The media and peace: from Vietnam to the ‘War on terror’, (Palgrave, Macmillan) Allen, Tim & Jean Seaton (1999), The Media of Conflict, (Zed Books) Beebe, Shannon & Mary Kaldor (2010), The Ultimate Weapon is No Weapon: Human Security and the New Rules of War and Peace, (Public Affairs) Hawkins, Virgil (2008), Stealth Conflicts: How the World’s Worst Violence is Ignored, (Ashgate) Ibrahim Seaga Shaw, Jake Lynch, and Robert A. Hackett (2011), Expanding Peace Journalism, (Sydney University Press). Jake Lynch, Johan Galtung (2010), Reporting Conflict: New Directions in Peace Journalism, (University of Queensland Press). Lynch, Jake (2008), Debates in Peace Journalism, (Sydney University Press) Richard Keeble, John Tulloch, Florian Zollman (2010), Peace Journalism, War and Conflict Resolution, (New York, Peter Lang) Lynch, Jake and Annabel Mc Goldbrick (2005), Peace Journalism, (Hawthorn Press) Conflict and Communication Online (http://www.cco.regener-online.de) •Vol.5, No.2, 2006, “Peace journalism I: Theoretical approaches” •Vol.6, No.1, 2007, “Peace journalism II: Case studies and teaching modules” •Vol.6, No.2, 2007, “The peace journalism controversy” Galtung J. (2006), “Peace Journalism as an Ethical Challenge”, GMJ: Mediterranean Edition 1(2) Jake Lynch (2007), “What is so great about peace journalism?”, GMJ: Mediterranean Edition 1(1) Marquette International Law 93, 2009, “International Media and Conflict Resolution: Making the connection”. Peace and Policy Τεύχος 13, 2009, “Peace Journalism in Time of War”. Rukhsana Aslam (2011), “Peace journalism: A paradigm shift in traditional media approach”, Pacific Journalism Review, 17:119-139. Reporting the World. http://www.reportingtheworld.org Search for Common Ground. http://www.sfcg.org Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies. http://www.centrepeaceconflictstudies.org Center for War Peace and the News Media. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_War%2C_Peace%2C_and_the_News_Media Institute for War and Peace Reporting. www.iwpr.net

IP2300 | Writing for the Print Media

Course Description This advanced English course focuses on news (both hard and soft) and feature story writing for the print media. By combining theory and practice it introduces students to headline language, news story format, leads, the Associated Press stylebook and news writing techniques. The students also have the opportunity to practice their interviewing skills and to write personality features for the print media. Course Format This course will employ seminar lectures, discussions, and practical in- and out-of-class short assignments. Course Evaluation The course carries no ECTS and as such it has no formal assessment. There is an optional mid-term and final term test. Bibliography The Associated Press Stylebook (2015). Associated Press. Bagnall, Nicholas (1993). Newspaper Language. Focal Press. Dominick, J.R. (2010). The Dynamics of Mass Communications: Media in the Digital Age. NJ: Mac-Graw Hill Education. Harris, G. & D. Spark (1995), 2nd edition. Practical Newspaper Reporting, Focal Press. Itule, B. D. and D. A. Anderson (1989), 2nd edition. News Writing and Reporting for Today’s Media. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Keeble, R. (1994). The Newspapers Handbook. London and New York: Routledge. Mencher, M. (1994), 6th edition. News Reporting and Writing. Wm. C. Brown Publishers. Metzler, K. (1997). Creative Interviewing. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Stovall, J. G. (2009), 7th edition. Writing for the Mass Media. Boston: Pearson.

Accademic Writing Course

Mcc 401 | dissertation research & writing skills.

Course Description This course is designed to help graduate students with academic writing by developing the skills necessary to produce high quality work in term-papers and the end-of-year dissertation. The lectures, tasks and activities are richly varied, ranging from small-scale language points to studying the discourse of journalism, media, and communication. Topics to be dealt with include: writing expository and argumentative texts, writing summaries, introductions and conclusions, discussion of data, citing and attributing sources, researching and creating bibliographies. Students receive feedback on their writing and are expected to engage in self-editing and peer-reviewing. The course is highly recommended for students with little experience in writing academic papers and for those who need to brush up their skills in academic writing. Learning Outcomes By the end of this course students should be able to: Understand the features of academic writing Understand the basics of sentence, paragraph, and argument structure Use and evaluate sources, and compile a bibliography Use punctuation, in-text references, quotations, and footnotes Avoid plagiarism Write summaries/introductions/conclusions Write academic essays and their end-of-year dissertation Understand and participate in the processes of self-editing and peer-reviewing. Workload Type of work Description Hours Lectures Thirteen 3-hour lectures 39 Independent study Study of academic discourse 30 Written assignments Optional tasks on language points (grammar, vocabulary, style)  and on various types of academic writing 60 Total workload 129  Assessment Type of assessment Learning outcome Impact on final grade Date of assessment The course carries no formal assessment – – –  

• Academic Staff
• Laboratories
• European Journalism
• Digital Media, Culture and Communication
• Application Process
• Academic Regulations
• Plagiarism Guidelines
• Dissertation Guidelines
• Program Regulation
• Financial Policy
• Academic Calendar

RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here . You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/ . Click “accept” to agree.

How health risk communication best practices can improve community flood risk communication

DeBree, S. , Brown, J. A. , & Southwell, B. G. (2024). How health risk communication best practices can improve community flood risk communication . Journal of Public Health and Emergency , 8 , Article 29. https://doi.org/10.21037/jphe-24-27

10.21037/jphe-24-27

• Share on Facebook
• Share on X.com
• Share on Linkedin

To contact an RTI author, request a report, or for additional information about publications by our experts, send us your request.

• [email protected]
• +1 919 541 8787

Meet the Experts

Brian G. Southwell

Jill A. Brown

Recent publications, variability in personal exposure to ultrafine and fine particles by microenvironment among adolescents in cincinnati, "if everyone knew about this, how many lives could we save", hospital healthcare resource utilization and associated hospital costs of patients with lupus nephritis in china.