Strategies for Risk Communication
Evolution, Evidence and Experience


15-17 May 2006
Montauk Yacht Club Resort & Marina
Montauk, Long Island, New York

This symposium, sponsored by the Society for Risk Analysis and the National Science Foundation, (Grant No. 0551330) explored practical methods and robust theories of risk communication arising from recent research in risk perception, neuroscience, and the evolutionary social sciences. The symposium addressed how humans process and perceive uncertainty and risks. The purpose of the symposium was to synthesize the findings from these diverse fields to inform the development of practical strategies for risk communication. There were several invited lecturers, interspersed with open discussion among the participants. There was also a small poster session in which participants described their research.

(Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.)


Overview

This two and a half day symposium brought together theorists and practitioners in risk communication, risk perception, brain research, and the evolutionary social sciences. Rapid progress in these fields has opened a new window on risk perception with practical implications for enhancing the effectiveness of risk communication. Some of the questions addressed at the symposium included


Institutional sponsors

NSF Decision, Risk and Management Sciences
National Science Foundation
Society for Risk Analysis
Applied Biomathematics
Pfizer


Who attended

The symposium was intended for academics, students, risk managers, public relations managers, advertisers, public interest advocates, journalists and science writers with professional or practical interest in risk communication. Presentations were structured so as to be understandable and beneficial to motivated newcomers in risk communication. The symposium was a forum for discussion and debate, rather than a simple teaching workshop. Focus was provided by presentations from invited speakers with ample time allowed for open-format discussion among all participants.

In all there were 48 participants from 8 countries, representing academia, several levels of govenment, and private industry.  The table below lists participants and their affiliations.

Name
Affiliation

Joseph Andrade

Utah Science Center; University of Utah

Paul Bingham

Stony Brook University

Ann Bostrom

Georgia Institute of Technology

Mark Burgman

University of Melbourne

Martin Clauberg

Dr. Clauberg--Consulting

Hester Coan

Fairleigh Dickinson University

Nohra Corredor

Ecological Art On-line Portal

Laura Dill Morton

Pfizer

Scott Ferson

Applied Biomathematics

Adam Finkel

Princeton Univeristy

Lev Ginzburg

Applied Biomathematics

Ronald Hellman

ACSS, CUNY

Patricia Hough

Sandia National Laboratories

Charlie Janson

Stony Brook University

Joe Kable

New York Univeristy

Elke Kurz-Milcke

Max Planck Institute

Youngai Lee

Ewha Women's University, Korea

Nakeung Lee

Ewha Women's University, Korea

Igor Linkov

Cambridge Environmental

Jackie Little

Los Alamos National Laboratory

Tom Long

The Sapphire Group

Darcy Lonsdale

Stony Brook University

Claudia Naegeli

Zurich University of Applied Sciences

Mariko Nishizawa

University of Stuttgart

Claude Panneton

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Ellen Peters

Decision Research

Joshua Reinert

Information Systems Laboratories

Victor Ricciardi

Kentucky State University

David Ropeik

Harvard University

R. Jean Ruth

General Motors R&D

Walter Rutledge

Sandia National Laboratories

Alan Sanfey

University of Arizona

Delores (Lori) Severtson

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Chris Shilling

Pfizer

Joanne Souza

Stony Brook University

Adrian Sparrow

Agriculture and Forestry, New Zealand

Gael Spivak

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Andy Stirling

University of Sussex

Mary-Jo Takach

Rhode Island Department of Health

W. Troy Tucker

Applied Biomathematics

Jessica Turnley

Galisteo Consulting Group, Inc.

Verena Vorhold

Forschungszentrum Jülich

X.T. Wang

University of South Dakota

Karli Watson

Duke University

J. Lee Westmaas

Stony Brook University

Peter Wright

The Dow Chemical Company

Larry Young

Sandia National Laboratories



Schedule

 
Sunday, 14 May
 
6:30 to 8:00 pm
Reception, Turtle Room.
Drinks and hors d'oeuvres
 
 
Monday, 15 May
 
7:00 am
Breakfast, Waterside Ballroom
8:00
Welcome, Scott Ferson, Applied Biomathematics
8:10
"Introduction: Risk communication - evolution, evidence, experience"
W. Troy Tucker, Applied Biomathematics
8:30
“Risk realities and risk perception”
David Ropeik, Harvard School of Public Health
9:30
Discussion
10:00
Break
10:30
“Numeracy, affect, and risk”
Ellen Peters, Decision Research and University of Oregon
11:30
Discussion
12:00
“A lawyer’s perspective on risk communication”
Peter Wright, The Dow Chemical Company
12:30
Lunch, Turtle Room
1:30 pm
“Brain evolution and neural mechanisms for economic and social decisions”
Karli Watson, Duke University
2:30
Discussion
3:00
Break
3:30
“Resolving linguistic uncertainty in hazard evaluation”
Mark Burgman, University of Melbourne
4:00
“Mental calculators that perceive risk and how we may educate them”
Elke Kurz-Milcke and Gerd Gigerenzer, Max Planck Institute
5:00
Discussion
5:30
Free time
7:30
Dinner, Turtle Room
"Designing Intelligence: An Evolutionary Perspective on the Origins of Science and Religion"
Charles Janson, Stony Brook University
 
 

Tuesday, 16 May
 
7:00 am
Breakfast, Waterside Ballroom
8:00
“Mental models, risk perception, and communication”
Ann Bostrom, Georgia Institute of Technology
9:00
Discussion
9:30
"EU initiative on risk perception methodologies and empirical studies on chemicals released from consumer products and articles"
Martin Clauberg, University of Tennessee
10:00
Break
10:30
“The neural basis of decision-making”
Alan Sanfey, University of Arizona
11:30
Discussion
12:00
Lunch, Turtle Room
1:00
“Why risk communication fails the benefit-cost test: 'Tis no gift to be simple”
Adam Finkel, Princeton University and UMDNJ School of Public Health
2:00
Discussion
2:30
“Risk Perception and Reality in the Pharmaceutical Industry”
Christopher Shilling, Pfizer Global Research and Development
3:00
Break
3:30
“Evolutionary domains of risk and reference points-bounded risky choice”
X.T. Wang, University of South Dakota
4:30
Discussion
5:00
Free time
7:30
Dinner, Turtle Room
"A rich, new view of what human minds evolved to do"
Paul Bingham, Stony Brook University
 
 

Wednesday, 17 May
 
7:00 am
Breakfast, Waterside Ballroom
8:00
“Neural mechanisms of temporal discounting”
Joseph Kable, New York University
9:00
Discussion
9:30
“Stakeholders, politics, fairness, and risk communication”
Andrew Stirling, University of Sussex
10:00
Break
10:30
"Evolved altruism, strong reciprocity, and perception of risk"
W. Troy Tucker, Applied Biomathematics
11:30
Discussion
12:00
Wrap-up
12:30 pm
Adjourn


Poster session

Participants were invited and encouraged to present posters at the symposium. The posters were displayed throughout the event. 


Speakers


Background

A better understanding of the way in which the human brain processes information relevant to risk might substantially improve the communication of risk to the public. Rapid progress in this direction is being made, in parallel, in three distinct scientific disciplines: psychometric risk perception studies, neuroscience, and the evolutionary social sciences. Unfortunately there has been little opportunity for interaction between risk researchers across these fields, hampering the spread of important new insights. The proposed symposium will bring together researchers active in these disciplines to directly confront issues of risk perception and communication common to all.

Currently, there are many strategies for communicating risks to stakeholders and the public. They range from lists of ad hoc injunctions borne from bitter experiences in hostile public meetings to elaborate systematic programs involving research phases and iterated implementations.

Expert risk perception often differs from that of the public. Prevailing paradigms in risk communication research often assert that expert assessments represent the normative basis of rational perception and that deviant perceptions are irrational in some sense. The goal of risk communication, in this context, is to bring public perception into line with expert risk assessments in order for the public to be able to make rationally informed choices. The idiosyncratic and emotion-laden public response to many risks makes this goal a challenge.

Research in risk perception has been guided by the psychometric paradigm. From its inception, this approach was fundamentally quantitative and empirically driven, with theories arising from analyses of observations and experiments. Agreement exists regarding the importance to risk perception of specific factors such as information context, uncertainty, trust, control, voluntariness, and emotional response. A general theory has to account for these factors with reference to the way that the brain processes information relevant to risk.

Some researchers propose a “dual-process” theory of cognition. It proposes two modes of cognition: experiential and rational. The experiential mode is dominated by emotional responses to information: “intuition, instinct, and gut feeling”. The theory supposes this to be the original mode of thinking until the very recent evolution of analytical reasoning, which is presumed to be a culturally transmitted phenomenon. Although there exists much support for this view, it may stand to gain from a growing body of research and theory building in evolutionary social sciences such as evolutionary anthropology, evolutionary psychology, evolutionary economics, as well as the burgeoning field of evolutionary neuroscience.

A general theory of how the brain processes information, derived from Darwin's theory of natural evolution, may provide significant insight into risk perception. Over the last 25 years, research in the evolutionary social sciences has developed an explanatory theory of human behavior. This body of theory is supported by experimental and observational studies in evolutionary anthropology, evolutionary psychology, evolutionary economics, and most recently neuroeconomics. The key insight powering these developments is that natural selection is the cause of biological complexity, that complex features of organisms are adaptations, and that adaptations are fairly well tuned to perform a few very specific functions. In psychology, Marr independently derived the evolutionary perspective from first principles of computation, leading to the theory that the brain consists of many domain-specific problem-solving mechanisms. This theory may lead to a rich set of expectations regarding how both experts and the general public perceive risk.

It is often presumed that humans are irrational about risk because it involves the perception and calculation of probabilities. Indeed, this may explain why probability theory is notoriously unintuitive and why, at roughly 200 years, it is the youngest of the main branches of mathematics. Neophytes in probability theory as well as professionals, and even luminaries such as Laplace, de Morgan, and Boole, make gross mistakes that have no parallel in other mathematical disciplines. A recent example of this is the spate of erroneous public statements about the “Monty Hall problem” by university mathematics professors.

Because probability theory is a central mathematical tool of risk analysis, risk communication would seem to be especially disadvantaged. Because the lay public is believed to often be irrational about risks, much of risk communication is devoted to remedial education. Yet, evolution has endowed humans with sensory structures and behavioral patterns that are at least reasonably well suited for practical decision-making in uncertain environments. Recent work has demonstrated that, when data is presented to the lay person in formats the brain is adapted to understand, many of these “biases” are mitigated and subjects accurately solve complex problems.

This symposium will explore these recent findings and emerging ideas regarding the mental calculators that human beings use to reckon about risks, the evolutionary origins of these calculators, and the proximate neurological bases of risk perception and cognition that surely underlie risk communications. It will seek to uncover strategies for making communication efforts more intelligible and relevant, and thus more successful. The symposium will examine how these theoretical ideas translate into communication strategies that could at least foretell, if not forestall or prevent, risk communication missteps and failures. It will seek to collate the injunctions that risk communicators have developed from their practical experience with theory that gives these injunctions context and extensibility.


Registration

A maximum of 80 participants was to be allowed in order to encourage discussion and potential collaboration. The registration fee was $275 before 14 April 2006, or $325 thereafter and on site. Registration was administered by Patrick Mercardante of Applied Biomathematics:

Patrick Mercardante
Applied Biomathematics
100 North Country Road
Setauket, New York 11733 USA

Email: admin@ramas.com
Telephone: 1-631-751-4350
Fax: 1-631-751-3435

MasterCard and Visa are accepted

The registration fee included a reception Sunday evening and all meals for the duration of the symposium (3 breakfasts, 3 lunches, 2 dinners). Full refunds of the registration fee were allowed up to 4 days before the symposium. After that, up until the first day of the symposium, a cancellation fee of $70 was imposed.


Venue

The symposium was be held 15-17 May 2006 at the Montauk Yacht Club Resort and Marina. Conference participants booked a room at least 1 month prior to the event to receive the special conference rate of $109 + tax per night, ($358.07 total for 3 nights).

Montauk Yacht Club Resort & Marina
32 Star Island Road/Box 5048
Montauk, New York 11954

Telephone: 1-888-692-8668 (8:30am to 6pm)
Fax: 1-631-668-6181
www.montaukyachtclub.com
(To register on-line, use Group/Event ID: 27526)


Travel tips

The airports in the New York metropolitan area include LaGuardia (LGA), Kennedy (JFK), and Newark (EWR). Macarthur regional airport at Islip, Long Island, (ISP) which is served by Southwest, US Air, Delta, ATA, Continental, and Northwest, may also be convenient. If you live in the New York City or tristate area, there are several ways to travel to Montauk, including personal car, express bus, limousine, train, ferry, and private boat.

Renting a car at LGA, JFK, Islip, or Newark

Major car rental companies include Hertz Enterprise Avis Budget Dollar Thrifty

The rental company will help you with directions to Montauk. The trip by car will likely take between two and two and a half hours.

Train from JFK, LGA, ISP, or Manhattan

It is possible to take the Long Island Rail Road from Manhattan (Pennsylvania Station on 34th Street), JFK, LGA, or ISP to Montauk. Although it is inexpensive, it is not convenient on Sunday because there are so few trains. It may be more convenient to get you back to your airport after the symposium.

Train schedules and fares can be found on-line at http://lirr42.mta.info/index.asp or by calling the railroad's voice-activated telephone line at 1-516-822-5477.

Penn Station: If you take the train from Manhattan, you will have to transfer at the Jamaica or Babylon station, which means you will need to get off the train, wait a minute or two, and reboard a second train to continue the journey.

The one-way fare is about $15 off peak. Buying your ticket from the conductor on the train will cost an additional $5, and traveling during peak (departing New York City on weekdays between 4 and 8 pm) will cost another $5 more.

ISP: You will have to take a cab from the Islip Airport to the Long Island Railroad Station in Patchogue. The cab fare will be about $22 and will take about 15 minutes. Cabs can be hailed at the airport, or you can call 631-589-7878 to order one. There are very few trains on Sundays (9:17am, 11:17am, 1:13pm, 10:14pm and 2:14am Monday morning). The trip takes about two hours, so the 10:14 arrives in Montauk at midnight and the 2:14 comes in at 4 in the morning. The one-way fare is about $6, or $11 if you buy the ticket from the conductor on the train.

LGA: Like ISP, you will need to get a cab to the Flushing-Main Street LIRR station. It's not far from the airport but expect $25 and 20 minutes. Note that from Flushing you need to go to Penn Station in Manhattan to connect to a train to Montauk.

JFK: If you come in through JFK airport, the new AirTrain service will take you from the airport to Jamaica station where you can catch the Long Island Railroad. Airtrains leave every few minutes 24 hours per day. The trip takes about 15 minutes and costs about $7.

When you get off the train in Montauk, call the hotel (631-668-7716) and they will pick you up.

Driving from Boston and Connecticut

You can drive from the Boston area to Montauk using a series of ferries in about 5 hours. The trip is actually quite beautiful and interesting. From 95 south, use Exit 84 south to downtown New London, Connecticut. At the second light turn left onto Governor Winthrop Boulevard. Cross the railroad tracks and turn right to the Cross Sound Ferry. Take the ferry from to Orient Point, New York. The ferries depart every one or two hours during the day. The fare is $42, plus $12 per passenger, each way. Reservations are required and can be made at (1-860-443-5281) or https://www.longislandferry.com/.

In Orient Point, take 25A west for 9 miles and turn left at the flashing light and travel 1 mile to Greenport. At the next flashing light go right for 2 blocks to the traffic light. Make a left at the light and travel for 1 block to the North Ferry Company. Take the ferry to Shelter Island, and then continue on Route 114 south for 4.5 miles across Shelter Island to the South Ferry Company. Take this ferry from Shelter Island to North Haven (which is on the South Fork of Long Island). Both of these ferries depart every 15 or 20 minutes, from about 6 in the morning until almost midnight. They each cost about $10 each way. Reservations on these ferries is not required. Further information about these ferries is available on their respective websites http://www.northferry.com/ and http://www.southferry.com/.

Express bus service

If you fly into LGA, JFK, ISP, or if you're coming from Manhattan, you may take the Hampton Jitney (bus) service to Montauk. Jitneys depart from Manhattan hourly. The fare for the jitney is about $30 one way, and about $50 round trip. However, you must take a cab from the airports to get the jitney. Depending on the airport, this cab ride will take 10 to 25 minutes and will cost about $20. The Queens airport connection (LGA and JFK) bus stop is difficult for cabs to find. The Islip (ISP) airport connection is not much easier. You must call 631-283-4600 to get directions to give to your cabbie. The jitney stops in Montauk in front of the police station. Call the Montauk Yacht Club (631-668-3100 or 631-668-6181) when you arrive to pick you up. You must book the jitney in advance by telephone (631-283-4600) or on-line at http://www.hamptonjitney.com.

Limousine service

Many companies provide limousine service on Long Island and especially in New York City. Although it can be rather expensive, this option may be most convenient if you do not drive a car yourself. The driver will pick you up inside the airport at baggage claim, and drive you directly to the hotel. A limo from either LGA or JFK to the Montauk Yacht Club costs about $200. The trip will take about two or two and a half hours. Limo from Islip Airport to the Montauk Yacht Club costs about $160. The trip will take about two or two and a half hours. You must reserve limo service in advance. You can save $30 or so from this fare with a "shared" car service, but this will generally take longer because it would involve making side stops for other passengers. You must reserve limo service in advance. Some limo companies

Spartan Limousine (1-631-928-5454)

Winston Airport Limousine http://www.winstontrans.com (1-800-424-7767)

Classic Airport Shuttle http://www.classictrans.com (1-631-701-2085)

Colonial Transportation http://www.colonialtransportation.com (1-631-589-7878)

Elite Transport http://www.litransportation.com (1-631-878-3300)

Town Car Service - J. Caravaggio (1-516-635-7974)

Private boat

It is also possible to sail your boat directly to the Montauk Yacht Club. Call the marina (1-631-668-7702) to make a reservation for a slip. The docking fee is $2.75 per foot during the week and $3 per foot on the weekends.


Organizing committee

The symposium organizers, drawn from academia, consulting, and industry, served as discussants, lead question-and-answer periods, and moderated open discussion after each invited lecture. Several of the organizers also give short topical presentations.

Scott Ferson, Senior Scientist and Vice President, Applied Biomathematics
Adam Finkel, Visiting Professor, Princeton University, and Professor , UMDNJ School of Public Health
Charles Janson, Professor and Chair, Department of Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook University
Thomas F. Long, The Sapphire Group, Inc.
David Slavin, M.D., Executive Director, World Wide Development, Business Innovations Unit, Pfizer Global Research and Development Chris Shilling, Manager, Business Innovation Unit, Pfizer Global Research and Development
W. Troy Tucker, Research Scientist, Applied Biomathematics
Peter C. Wright, Esq., EH&S Special Projects Counsel, Dow


Links

Decision, Risk and Management Sciences (DRMS) http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5423&org=SES&from=home

National Science Foundation http://www.nsf.gov/

Society for Risk Analysis www.sra.org

The Human Behavior and Evolution Society http://www.hbes.com/

The Imprecise Probabilities Project http://www.sipta.org/

Society for Risk Analysis Annual Meeting http://www.sra.org/events_2004_meeting.php

Other events sponsored by the Society for Risk Analysis http://www.sra.org/events.php#otherevents

The New York Academy of Sciences http://www.nyas.org

          (NYAS manuscript preparation guidelines: http://www.nyas.org/annals/guidelines.asp)


Suggested reading

Peters, E., Västfjäll, D., Slovic, P., Mertz, C.K., Mazzocco, K., & Dickert, S. 2006. Numeracy and decision making. Psychological Science 17(5):408-414.

Allman, J.M., K.K. Watson, N.A. Tetreault, and A.Y. Hakeem. 2005. Intuition and autism: a possible role for Von Economo neurons. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9(8):367-373.

Knutson, B., J. Taylor, M. Kaufman, R. Peterson, and G. Glover. 2005. Distributed neural representation of expected value. Journal of Neuroscience 25(19):4806-4812.

Hsu, M., M. Bhatt, R. Adolphs, D. Tranel, and C.F. Camerer. 2005. Neural systems responding to degrees of uncertainty in human decision-making. Science 310:1680-1683.

Rustichini, A. 2005. Emotion and reason in making decisions. Science 310:1624-1625.

Glimcher, P.W. and A. Rustichini. 2004. Neuroeconomics: the consilience of brain and decision. Science 306:447-452.

Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. 2004. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis 24:311-322.

Sanfey, A.G., J.K. Rilling, J.A. Aronson, L.E. Nystrom, and J.D. Cohen. 2003. The neural basis of economic decision-making in the ultimatum game. Science 300:1755-1758.

Allman, J., A. Hakeem, and K. Watson. 2002. Two phylogenetic specializations in the human brain. Neuroscientist 8(4):335-346.

Gigerenzer, G. 2002. Calculated Risks: How to Know When Numbers Deceive You. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Morgan, M.G., B. Fischhoff, A. Bostrom, and C.J. Atman. 2002. Risk Communication: A Mental Models Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pinker, S. 2002. The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. New York: Viking.

Loewenstein, G.F., E.U. Weber, C.K. Hsee, and E.S. Welch. 2001. Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin 127(2):267-286.

O’Doherty, J., M.L. Kringelbach, E.T. Rolls, J. Hornak, and C. Andrews. 2001. Abstract reward and punishment representations in the human orbitofrontal cortex. Nature Neuroscience 4(1):95-102.

Peters, E. and P. Slovic. 2000. The springs of action: affective and analytical information processing in choice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 26(12):1465-1475.

Rode, C. and X.T. Wang. 2000. Risk-sensitive decision making examined within an evolutionary framework. American Behavioral Scientist 43(6):926-939.

Slovic, P. 1999. Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Analysis 19(4):689-701.

Bechara, A., H. Damasio, D. Tranel, and A.R. Damasio. 1997. Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science 275:1293-1295.

Pinker, S. 1997. How the Mind Works. New York: Norton.

Cosmides, L. and J. Tooby. 1996. Are humans good intuitive statisticians after All? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty. Cognition 58:1-73.

Guth, W. 1995. On ultimatum bargaining experiments--a personal review. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 27:329-344.

Barkow, J.H., L. Cosmides, and J. Tooby. 1992. The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture. New York: Oxford University Press.

Gigerenzer, G. 1991. How to make cognitive illusions disappear: beyond heuristics and biases. European Review of Social Psychology 2:83-115.

Cosmides, L. 1989. The logic of social exchange: has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason Selection Task. Cognition 31:187-276.

Slovic, P. 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236:280-285.


More information

For more information, please contact Troy Tucker at troy@ramas.com, telephone 1-631-751-4350, or fax -3435.






































Last updated 25 June 2007
Copyright 2006, 2007 Applied Biomathematics
All rights reserved worldwide

Please direct questions about or problems with this webpage to troy@ramas.com