Correcting Misconceptions with Risk Communication Texts: Is a Myth-Fact Box a Good Idea? A. Bostrom, School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332-0345; and C. J. Atman, Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261
Mental models research has shown that risk communication is more effective at improving knowledge and inferences about a risk if it addresses and corrects common misconceptions. The correction of misconceptions can either be incorporated into an existing brochure, or presented separately, in a stand-alone section. In the first case, an empirically tested text structure may provide the reader with context that is necessary to reinforce correct concepts and dispel misconceptions effectively. However, if provided in context rather than separately, misconceptions might mistakenly be interpreted as correct if readers are skimming, or not reading carefully. Many risk communications texts include stand-alone sections that address common misconceptions or problems. These sections are often labeled Myths, or Myths and Facts. To examine the effectiveness of these stand-alone sections, two brochures on global climate change were created with the same content. The brochures differ only in that one includes a Myth-Fact Box at the end of the brochure, whereas the other incorporates the correction of common misconceptions into the text. Immediate and delayed effects of these brochures on knowledge and inferences were tested empirically (N=437) under both skimming and reading conditions. Results and implications for risk communicators will be presented.
Work supported by the National Science Foundation under Contracts SES92-09940 and SES92-09553, and by the Electric Power Research Institute under Contracts 2955-10 and 2955-11.