IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v103y2020i2d10.1007_s11069-020-04078-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Content driving exposure and attention to tweets during local, high-impact weather events

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua D. Eachus

    (Louisiana State University)

  • Barry D. Keim

    (Louisiana State University)

Abstract

The use of Twitter to disseminate weather information presents need for the analysis of what types of messages, and specifically warning messages, incur exposure and attention. Having this knowledge could increase exposure and attention to messages and perhaps increase retransmission through Twitter. Two models describe the cognitive processing of tweets and warnings. The extended parallel process model describes components of an effective warning message. Even in a tweet, ignoring one or both critical components of a warning—threat and efficacy—could inhibit a user from taking the correct protective action. The protective action decision model (PADM) describes risk perception and factors that enable or disable one from giving attention to a message. The PADM also helps to define impressions, retweets or likes as metrics of exposure or attention to a tweet. Tweets from three Twitter accounts within one television market during two high-impact weather events were examined. From an individual account, impressions, retweets and likes were collected to identify commonalities to tweets with much exposure and attention. Results indicate photographs and geographically specific messages were popular. Second, from two competing television weather accounts, warning tweet formats were compared to identify exposure and attention to each. Warning tweets providing threat and efficacy performed best. The purpose of this work is twofold. First is to identify local trends to compliment findings from studies with large sample sizes. Second is to apply existing theory on warning message content to Twitter. This approach should benefit communication strategies of key information nodes—local meteorologists—during high-impact weather events.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua D. Eachus & Barry D. Keim, 2020. "Content driving exposure and attention to tweets during local, high-impact weather events," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 103(2), pages 2207-2229, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:103:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s11069-020-04078-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-020-04078-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069-020-04078-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-020-04078-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael K. Lindell & Ronald W. Perry, 2012. "The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 616-632, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Annabelle Workman & Penelope J. Jones & Amanda J. Wheeler & Sharon L. Campbell & Grant J. Williamson & Chris Lucani & David M.J.S. Bowman & Nick Cooling & Fay H. Johnston, 2021. "Environmental Hazards and Behavior Change: User Perspectives on the Usability and Effectiveness of the AirRater Smartphone App," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Julia S. Becker & Sally H. Potter & Lauren J. Vinnell & Kazuya Nakayachi & Sara K. McBride & David M. Johnston, 2020. "Earthquake early warning in Aotearoa New Zealand: a survey of public perspectives to guide warning system development," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. David V. Pynadath & Bistra Dilkina & David C. Jeong & Richard S. John & Stacy C. Marsella & Chirag Merchant & Lynn C. Miller & Stephen J. Read, 2023. "Disaster world," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 84-117, March.
    4. Manqing Wu & Guochun Wu, 2020. "An Analysis of Rural Households’ Earthquake-Resistant Construction Behavior: Evidence from Pingliang and Yuxi, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-14, December.
    5. Ji Yun Lee & Fangjiao Ma & Yue Li, 2022. "Understanding homeowner proactive actions for managing wildfire risks," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 114(2), pages 1525-1547, November.
    6. Michael R. Greenberg & Marc D. Weiner & Robert Noland & Jeanne Herb & Marjorie Kaplan & Anthony J. Broccoli, 2014. "Public Support for Policies to Reduce Risk After Hurricane Sandy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(6), pages 997-1012, June.
    7. Andrea Cerase & Lorenzo Cugliari, 2023. "Something Still Remains: Factors Affecting Tsunami Risk Perception on the Coasts Hit by the Reggio Calabria-Messina 1908 Event (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, February.
    8. Taixiang Duan & Hechao Jiang & Xiangshu Deng & Qiongwen Zhang & Fang Wang, 2020. "Government Intervention, Risk Perception, and the Adoption of Protective Action Recommendations: Evidence from the COVID-19 Prevention and Control Experience of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-17, May.
    9. Raul P. Lejano & Muhammad Saidur Rahman & Laila Kabir, 2020. "Risk Communication for Empowerment: Interventions in a Rohingya Refugee Settlement," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(11), pages 2360-2372, November.
    10. Joop de Boer & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Teun Terpstra, 2014. "Improving Flood Risk Communication by Focusing on Prevention‐Focused Motivation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 309-322, February.
    11. Morshedi, Mohamad Ali & Kashani, Hamed, 2022. "Assessment of vulnerability reduction policies: Integration of economic and cognitive models of decision-making," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    12. Ye, Maoxin & Lyu, Zeyu, 2020. "Trust, risk perception, and COVID-19 infections: Evidence from multilevel analyses of combined original dataset in China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    13. Yingying Sun & Katsuya Yamori, 2018. "Risk Management and Technology: Case Studies of Tsunami Evacuation Drills in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-14, August.
    14. Anna-Maria Aksan & William F. Vásquez, 2019. "Quality Perceptions and Water Treatment Behavior at the Household Level," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 1-33, July.
    15. Ao Zhang & Hao Yang & Zhenlei Tian & Shuning Tong, 2022. "Evolution Model and Simulation Study of the Public Risk Perception of COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-29, September.
    16. Jennifer M. First & Kelsey Ellis & Mary Lehman Held & Florence Glass, 2021. "Identifying Risk and Resilience Factors Impacting Mental Health among Black and Latinx Adults following Nocturnal Tornadoes in the U.S. Southeast," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-13, August.
    17. Wei Qi & Xiumei Guo & Xia Wu & Dora Marinova & Jin Fan, 2018. "Do the sunk cost effect and cognitive dissonance increase risk perception? An empirical study in the context of city smog," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(5), pages 2269-2289, September.
    18. Junji Urata & Adam J. Pel, 2018. "People's Risk Recognition Preceding Evacuation and Its Role in Demand Modeling and Planning," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 889-905, May.
    19. David N. Sattler & James M. Graham & Albert Whippy & Richard Atienza & James Johnson, 2023. "Developing a Climate Change Risk Perception Model in the Philippines and Fiji: Posttraumatic Growth Plays Central Role," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-16, January.
    20. Xuemei Fang & Liang Cao & Luyi Zhang & Binbin Peng, 2023. "Risk perception and resistance behavior intention of residents living near chemical industry parks: an empirical analysis in China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 115(2), pages 1655-1675, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:103:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s11069-020-04078-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.