Risk communication

Risk communication research examines how people perceive, understand, and respond to information about uncertain future events that could harm them (health risks, environmental risks, financial risks, etc.). Core insights include: (1) people define "risk" differently based on values, ideology, and cultural background; (2) trust in communicators often matters more than factual content; (3) uncertainty is inherent to risk and must be communicated transparently; (4) emotions drive risk perception more than facts alone.

When applied to misinformation, risk communication research reveals that fact-checking is itself a form of risk communication: fact-checkers attempt to define what the "risk of misinformation" is and to establish themselves as trustworthy mitigators. This reframe is powerful because it explains why simple factual corrections fail in polarized contexts—if subgroups define the misinformation risk differently (e.g., "the risk is dishonest media" vs. "the risk is dangerous disinformation"), fact-checkers' credibility suffers when their efforts are perceived as missing the "real" problem.

Key papers

• Krause et al. (2020) — Fact-checking as risk communication — Applies 40+ years of risk communication research to COVID-19 misinformation, arguing that fact-checking fails without addressing trust barriers, multi-layered risk definitions, and genuine uncertainty.

Key concepts

• Risk perception: the subjective understanding of probability and severity of harm. Varies across individuals and groups based on affect, trust, values, and cultural worldviews.
• Trust: foundational to risk communication. Factual knowledge matters far less than trust in the communicator.
• Uncertainty: inherent to risk. Transparent acknowledgment of uncertainty does not reduce credibility (Van Der Bles et al., 2020); hiding it does.
• Multi-layered risks: when the subject of misinformation is itself a risk (e.g., COVID-19), risk perceptions compound. People may simultaneously hold different beliefs about the primary risk (COVID-19 severity) and the secondary risk (misinformation dangerousness).

Connections

• Fact-checking and corrections — fact-checking is a form of risk communication; cannot succeed without addressing trust and risk-definition differences.
• COVID-19 misinformation and the infodemic — COVID-19 misinformation is a paradigmatic case of multi-layered risk communication (health risk + misinformation risk).
• Trust in institutions and communicators — central to risk perception and risk communication effectiveness.