Abstract
ObjectivesMembers of the public are often sceptical about warnings of an impending public health crisis. Breaking through this scepticism is important if we are to convince people to take urgent protective action. In this paper we explored correlates of perceiving that ‘too much fuss’ was being made about the 2009/10 influenza A H1N1v (‘swine flu’) pandemic. Study designA secondary analysis of data from 39 nationally representative telephone surveys conducted in the UK during the pandemic. MethodsEach cross-sectional survey (combined n = 42,420) collected data over a three day period and asked participants to state whether they agreed or disagreed that ‘too much fuss is being made about the risk of swine flu.’ ResultsOverall, 55.1% of people agreed or strongly agreed with this sentiment. Perceiving that too much fuss was being made was associated with: being male, being white, being generally healthy, trusting most in a primary care physician to provide advice, not knowing someone who had contracted the illness, believing you know a lot about the outbreak, not wishing to receive additional information about the outbreak and possessing worse factual knowledge about the outbreak than other people. ConclusionsIn future disease outbreaks merely providing factual information is unlikely to engage people who are sceptical about the need to take action. Instead, messages which challenge their perceived knowledge and which present case studies of people who have been affected may prove more effective, especially when delivered through trusted channels.
Highlights
It is sometimes assumed that warning people about an impending public health crisis will cause panic.[1]
This widespread scepticism poses a problem for public health officials and organisations who may need to convince a population to engage in precautionary behaviour
A first set of regression analyses assessed the role of demographic variables as predictors, including after adjustment for all other demographic variables. We examined these associations for the entire dataset as well as in three pandemic periods: in the early stages of the outbreak before the first UK death had occurred, at the height of the first wave of illness to occur in the UK and at the tail end of the outbreak
Summary
It is sometimes assumed that warning people about an impending public health crisis will cause panic.[1]. Despite concerns that the impending pandemic could be severe, and in the face of extensive (and largely accurate2) media coverage, surveys conducted in the UK found that over two-thirds of people thought that the media were over-exaggerating the situation[3] while around half the population agreed with a statement that ‘too much fuss’ was being made.[4] High levels of scepticism have been found for other forms of urgent public health warning[5] and been linked to ‘warning fatigue’6e8 and to a perception that health-related media reporting is based more on scaremongering than on accurate journalism.9e11. Public health officials and organisations will need to ensure that their communications reach sceptical people and are able to influence their thinking, emotions and behaviour
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
