Approaches to communication

Communication scientists have developed a large number of communication models (Gutteling and Wiegman, 1996). Two popular risk communication models are known as the ‘technical view’ and the ‘democratic view’ (Rowan, 1994). The technical view of risk communication is based on the premise that the public needs accurate information and scientific expertise, and comprises a one-way, expert to lay-public information flow. The failure of the public to agree with this view is often attributed to ‘misunderstanding’ on the part of the public that can be informed or persuaded away by providing technical information in a form which can be understood by the public, or which is very influential in terms of attitude change. The basic premise is that, if only people could understand the technical risks, then they would also accept exposure to hazards where technical risk probabilities are very low. The democratic view, on the other hand, assumes that all stakeholders have maximum participation and decision-making power. In other words, persuasion is inappropriate because the aim of communication should be mutual understanding and not the exertion of power of one group over another. From this perspective, recourse to psychological models of persuasion is likely to be deemed inappropriate, although some would argue that there is an ethically sustainable role for such models in health psychology in general, for example, increasing fruit and vegetable intake in the diet in order to reduce the risks of cancer.