How Disaster Information Form, Source, Type, and Prior Disaster Exposure Affect Public Outcomes: Jumping on the Social Media Bandwagon?

Abstract

As public expectations continue to grow in terms of how governments should monitor social media during disasters, it is critical to provide empirical support for the extent to which governments should continue to invest in social media as essential disaster communication tools. This 3 × 4 × 2 between-subjects experiment (N = 871) tested which, if any, disaster information forms and sources were more likely to generate desired public outcomes such as intentions to seek and share information through an array of communication channels. The study also tested related influences of personmade versus natural disaster type. Finally, this study examined whether a known realworld disaster potentially affected participants' responses to hypothetical disaster information. Key findings include: (1) there were significant main effects of disaster information form and source, but no single form and source combination consistently predicted behavioral intentions; (2) there were no main effects of disaster type on all tested outcomes; and (3) there were no differences in how disaster information form and source affected participants' intentions to seek information before and after the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombings.

Alerting under imminent threat: guidance on alerts issued by outdoor siren and short message alerting systems

“…One way is to provide appropriate information about the message source (Mileti and Sorensen 1990). The source of the message should be clearly stated, spelled out in full (i.e., without abbreviations or acronyms) (Bean et al 2016), and perceived as credible by the receiving population (Wood et al 2015;Liu, Fraustino and Jin 2015). Additionally, the source of the message should be listed first (Bean et al 2016).…”

Effects of Media Channel, Crisis Type and Demographics on Audience Intent to Follow Instructing Information During Crisis

“…However, just as media use is, to a degree, socially stratified (Couldry et al, 2007), there is also evidence of stratification by context. Avery (2010) documents differences in channel preference between routine and crisis situations, and other studies (e.g., Austin, Liu, & Jin, 2012;Liu, Jin, & Austin, 2013;Liu et al, 2011Liu et al, , 2015 offer extensive experimental evidence of effects on audiences of crisis information source and form across crisis types. Liu and Kim (2011) note that 'investigating how publics process crisis messages via traditional and social media would be especially valuable given that publics process crisis messages differently on and offline' (Liu et al, 2011, p. 242).…”

“…Social media have increased public expectations that crisis responses are quicker, more accurate and even more transparent, as publics are engaged in crisis management via social media in a way they never have been before. Yet, Liu, Fraustino, and Jin (2015) explore public response to crisis information and 'caution emergency managers against jumping on the social media bandwagon to the exclusion of other venues' (Liu et al, 2015, p. 60).…”

“…Certainly, active, strategic engagement of social media is expected of organizations in good times and bad; however, the role of traditional media in this rapidly evolving communication landscape cannot be neglected even as social media draw their understandably vast attention in crisis research (Liu & Fraustino, 2014). With a few notable exceptions (Liu, Austin, & Jin, 2011;Liu et al, 2015), recommendations for engagement of traditional media tools in crisis response plans and how social media are affecting that mix are lacking, especially those from the perspective of the audience and how it seeks and uses information.…”

“…Benoit (2015) and Liu et al (2011) document the importance of strategically matching crisis information form and source when organizations respond to crisis. To extend that research and other studies (e.g., Liu et al, 2015) that have explored engagement of media channels during crisis, we analyse information-seeking preferences and intentions to follow recommended behaviours during different types of crises. This analysis utilizes Herzog's (1941) media uses and gratifications theory to examine how crisis type affects and how audiences use media to extend channel use recommendations based on a user, not organizationally centred, approach.…”