Risk communication and public response to potential radiation emergencies in New York City.

Public knowledge and awareness about radiation (both natural and manmade) tend to be low, while perceived risk of radiation tends to be high. High perceptions of risk associated with radiation have been linked to the affect heuristic and general feelings of dread, which are often not proportionate to actual risk. For example, studies routinely show that members of the public rate the risk of radiation from nuclear power plants as significantly higher (and riskier) than radiation from medical X-rays. This disconnect can have implications for adoption of protective actions during a potential radiation emergency and the perceived efficacy of these actions. This study explores how risk communication efforts influence public risk perceptions, intended protective action, and perceived efficacy of those actions. Using unique data from a survey of New York City adults, we analyze how information provision using different formats-no information, an infographic, an informational video-impact perceptions and response to a hypothetical radiation emergency. We hypothesize that respondents who receive some information, either through the infographic or the video, will have higher perceived efficacy and are more likely to take protective action. Findings suggest that providing information about what to do during a radiation emergency has a statistically significant impact on both perceived efficacy and adoption of protective action. Respondents who saw the informational video were most likely to say that they would take the correct protective actions and had the highest perceived efficacy, followed by those who saw the infographic.