IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v37y2017i11p2132-2149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the Mental Models Approach to Developing a Risk Communication: A Scoping Review of the Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Nick Boase
  • Mathew White
  • William Gaze
  • Clare Redshaw

Abstract

Risk communication is fundamental in ensuring people are equipped with the knowledge needed to navigate varied risks. One generally well‐regarded framework for the development of such communications is the mental models approach to risk communication (MMARC). Developed during the 1990s, the MMARC has been applied to a range of health, technological, and environmental risks. However, as yet, we know of no attempt to collate and review articles that evaluated communications developed using the MMARC. This article took a first step at addressing this gap by conducting a scoping review that aimed to begin to explore the fidelity with which the approach has been applied, explore whether there appeared to be sufficient studies to warrant a future systematic review, and identify future research questions. Although the initial search found over 100 articles explicitly applying the MMARC, only 12 of these developed a risk‐related communication that was tested against a control (and thus included in the current review). All studies reported a positive effect of the MMARC versus control communication for at least some of the outcome measures (knowledge being the most prevalent). However, there was wide variation between studies including type of control, outcomes assessed, and only five studies reported adopting a randomized design. The review highlights both the need for greater fidelity in the way future studies operationalize the MMARC approach, and suggests that a full‐scale systematic review of the MMARC literature appears justified, especially given the possibility of a large gray literature in this area.

Suggested Citation

  • Nick Boase & Mathew White & William Gaze & Clare Redshaw, 2017. "Evaluating the Mental Models Approach to Developing a Risk Communication: A Scoping Review of the Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(11), pages 2132-2149, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:37:y:2017:i:11:p:2132-2149
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12789
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12789
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12789?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marie-Eve Cousin & Michael Siegrist, 2010. "Risk perception of mobile communication: a mental models approach," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(5), pages 599-620, July.
    2. Kit S. Hagemann & Joachim Scholderer, 2009. "Hot Potato: Expert‐Consumer Differences in the Perception of a Second‐Generation Novel Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7), pages 1041-1055, July.
    3. Yan Cao & William L. McGill, 2013. "LinkIT: A Ludic Elicitation Game for Eliciting Risk Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1066-1082, June.
    4. Burgherr, Peter & Hirschberg, Stefan, 2008. "Severe accident risks in fossil energy chains: A comparative analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 538-553.
    5. Jing Shi & Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Michael Siegrist & Joseph Arvai, 2016. "Knowledge as a driver of public perceptions about climate change reassessed," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(8), pages 759-762, August.
    6. Kit Hagemann & Joachim Scholderer, 2007. "Consumer versus Expert Hazard Identification: A Mental Models Study of Mutation-bred Rice," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 449-464, June.
    7. Wändi Bruine De Bruin & Ümit Güvenç & Baruch Fischhoff & Christopher M. Armstrong & Denise Caruso, 2009. "Communicating About Xenotransplantation: Models and Scenarios," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(8), pages 1105-1115, August.
    8. Daniel Read & M. Granger Morgan, 1998. "The Efficacy of Different Methods for Informing the Public About the Range Dependency of Magnetic Fields from High Voltage Power Lines," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 603-610, October.
    9. Lauren A. Fleishman & Wändi Bruine De Bruin & M. Granger Morgan, 2010. "Informed Public Preferences for Electricity Portfolios with CCS and Other Low‐Carbon Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(9), pages 1399-1410, September.
    10. Jörg Niewöhner & Patrick Cox & Simon Gerrard & Nick Pidgeon, 2004. "Evaluating the Efficacy of a Mental Models Approach for Improving Occupational Chemical Risk Protection," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 349-361, April.
    11. Melissa Zaksek & Joseph L. Arvai, 2004. "Toward Improved Communication about Wildland Fire: Mental Models Research to Identify Information Needs for Natural Resource Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 1503-1514, December.
    12. Baruch Fischhoff, 1995. "Risk Perception and Communication Unplugged: Twenty Years of Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 137-145, April.
    13. Ann Bostrom & Cynthia J. Atman & Baruch Fischhoff & M. Granger Morgan, 1994. "Evaluating Risk Communications: Completing and Correcting Mental Models of Hazardous Processes, Part II," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(5), pages 789-798, October.
    14. A. Skarlatidou & T. Cheng & M. Haklay, 2012. "What Do Lay People Want to Know About the Disposal of Nuclear Waste? A Mental Model Approach to the Design and Development of an Online Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1496-1511, September.
    15. Cynthia J. Atman & Ann Bostrom & Baruch Fischhoff & M. Granger Morgan, 1994. "Designing Risk Communications: Completing and Correcting Mental Models of Hazardous Processes, Part I," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(5), pages 779-788, October.
    16. Michael Maharik & Baruch Fischhoff, 1993. "Risk Knowledge and Risk Attitudes Regarding Nuclear Energy Sources in Space," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 345-353, June.
    17. Leggio, Karyl B., 2004. "Managing uncertainty and risk," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 633-635, December.
    18. Tagashira, Naoto & Senda, Yasuko, 2011. "What information should be provided in communications on biomass power generation?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(7), pages 2519-2529, July.
    19. Rebecca E. Morss & Julie L. Demuth & Ann Bostrom & Jeffrey K. Lazo & Heather Lazrus, 2015. "Flash Flood Risks and Warning Decisions: A Mental Models Study of Forecasters, Public Officials, and Media Broadcasters in Boulder, Colorado," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(11), pages 2009-2028, November.
    20. Ann Bostrom & Ragnar E. Löfstedt, 2003. "Communicating Risk: Wireless and Hardwired," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 241-248, April.
    21. Marie-Eve Cousin & Simone Dohle & Michael Siegrist, 2011. "The impact of specific information provision on base station siting preferences," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(6), pages 703-715, June.
    22. Alessandri, Todd M. & Ford, David N. & Lander, Diane M. & Leggio, Karyl B. & Taylor, Marilyn, 2004. "Managing risk and uncertainty in complex capital projects," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 751-767, December.
    23. Christina Tobler & Vivianne Visschers & Michael Siegrist, 2012. "Consumers’ knowledge about climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 189-209, September.
    24. Klaus Wagner, 2007. "Mental Models of Flash Floods and Landslides," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 671-682, June.
    25. Downs, Julie S. & Murray, Pamela J. & Bruine de Bruin, Wändi & Penrose, Joyce & Palmgren, Claire & Fischhoff, Baruch, 2004. "Interactive video behavioral intervention to reduce adolescent females' STD risk: a randomized controlled trial," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(8), pages 1561-1572, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Liesbeth Claassen & Julia Hartmann & Susanne Wuijts, 2021. "How to Address Consumers’ Concerns and Information Needs about Emerging Chemical and Microbial Contaminants in Drinking Water; The Case of GenX in The Netherlands," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-17, October.
    2. Matthew S. VanDyke & Andy J. King, 2018. "Using the CAUSE Model to Understand Public Communication about Water Risks: Perspectives from Texas Groundwater District Officials on Drought and Availability," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(7), pages 1378-1389, July.
    3. Weina Liu & Chaonan Xu & Yajie Peng & Xinlong Xu, 2023. "Evolution of Tourism Risk Communication: A Bibliometric Analysis and Meta-Analysis of the Antecedents of Communicating Risk to Tourists," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-31, June.
    4. Dominic Balog‐Way & Katherine McComas & John Besley, 2020. "The Evolving Field of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2240-2262, November.

    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. Klaus Wagner, 2007. "Mental Models of Flash Floods and Landslides," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 671-682, June.
    2. Catherine E. LePrevost & Margaret R. Blanchard & W. Gregory Cope, 2011. "The Pesticide Risk Beliefs Inventory: A Quantitative Instrument for the Assessment of Beliefs about Pesticide Risks," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-13, June.
    3. Matthew D. Wood & Ann Bostrom & Todd Bridges & Igor Linkov, 2012. "Cognitive Mapping Tools: Review and Risk Management Needs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1333-1348, August.
    4. Heather Lazrus & Rebecca E. Morss & Julie L. Demuth & Jeffrey K. Lazo & Ann Bostrom, 2016. "“Know What to Do If You Encounter a Flash Flood”: Mental Models Analysis for Improving Flash Flood Risk Communication and Public Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 411-427, February.
    5. Yan Cao & William L. McGill, 2013. "LinkIT: A Ludic Elicitation Game for Eliciting Risk Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1066-1082, June.
    6. Angela Bearth & Marie‐Eve Cousin & Michael Siegrist, 2016. "“The Dose Makes the Poison”: Informing Consumers About the Scientific Risk Assessment of Food Additives," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 130-144, January.
    7. Liesbeth Claassen & Ann Bostrom & Danielle R.M. Timmermans, 2016. "Focal points for improving communications about electromagnetic fields and health: a mental models approach," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 246-269, February.
    8. Jörg Niewöhner & Patrick Cox & Simon Gerrard & Nick Pidgeon, 2004. "Evaluating the Efficacy of a Mental Models Approach for Improving Occupational Chemical Risk Protection," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 349-361, April.
    9. Alexa Tanner & Joseph Árvai, 2018. "Perceptions of Risk and Vulnerability Following Exposure to a Major Natural Disaster: The Calgary Flood of 2013," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(3), pages 548-561, March.
    10. Patrick Cox & Jörg Niewöhner & Nick Pidgeon & Simon Gerrard & Baruch Fischhoff & Donna Riley, 2003. "The Use of Mental Models in Chemical Risk Protection: Developing a Generic Workplace Methodology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 311-324, April.
    11. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Lauren A. Mayer & M. Granger Morgan, 2015. "Developing communications about CCS: three lessons learned," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 699-705, June.
    12. Lin, Tyrone T. & Huang, Shio-Ling, 2011. "Application of the modified Tobin's q to an uncertain energy-saving project with the real options concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 408-420, January.
    13. Lin, Tyrone T. & Huang, Shio-Ling, 2010. "An entry and exit model on the energy-saving investment strategy with real options," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 794-802, February.
    14. Branden B. Johnson, 1999. "Ethical Issues in Risk Communication: Continuing the Discussion," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 335-348, June.
    15. Mortoja, Md. Golam & Yigitcanlar, Tan, 2022. "Understanding political bias in climate change belief: A public perception study from South East Queensland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    16. Jamie K. Wardman, 2008. "The Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1619-1637, December.
    17. Regina Schoell & Claudia R. Binder, 2009. "System Perspectives of Experts and Farmers Regarding the Role of Livelihood Assets in Risk Perception: Results from the Structured Mental Model Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 205-222, February.
    18. Marion de Vries & Liesbeth Claassen & Marcel Mennen & Aura Timen & Margreet J. M. te Wierik & Danielle R. M. Timmermans, 2019. "Public Perceptions of Contentious Risk: The Case of Rubber Granulate in the Netherlands," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-16, June.
    19. Anna Scolobig & Monika Riegler & Philipp Preuner & JoAnne Linnerooth-Bayer & David Ottowitz & Stefan Hoyer & Birgit Jochum, 2017. "Warning System Options for Landslide Risk: A Case Study in Upper Austria," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-19, August.
    20. Bednyagin, Denis & Gnansounou, Edgard, 2011. "Real options valuation of fusion energy R&D programme," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 116-130, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:37:y:2017:i:11:p:2132-2149. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.