Outrage Factors Research Articles

Audience engagement in outrage factors embedded in COVID‐19 news: A content analysis of South Korean news articles and reader comments

AbstractThe risk perception of lay people is believed to be guided by qualitative characteristics of risk they perceive. Outrage factors refer to perceived characteristics of risk that arouse emotional responses and thereby influence risk perception. Conducting a content analysis of coronavirus disease 2019 online news coverage, we identified outrage factors embedded in news stories to determine how those factors are associated with audience engagement, measured by counting news consumer comments and clicks on emotional expressions on each news story. As a result, the average outrage score for a news story was significantly associated with the number of clicks on emotional expressions and comments. When it comes to individual outrage factors, a news story covering a case of violation against social distancing or other governmental guidelines was found to be accompanied by more comments and more emotional expressions, indicating the strongest power of moral nature. The outrage factor of voluntariness, human origin, accident history and controllability were also associated with one or both types of the audience responses. The news stories of business owners who involuntarily shut down their businesses or those comparing the current pandemic to Middle East respiratory syndrome that broke out in 2015 in the nation showed a similar pattern of audience engagement. Furthermore, liberal media were more likely to convey outrage factors than media with a less liberal orientation, which was manifested in the outrage score for each story. We discuss the potential of outrage factors as a new content‐based factor for audience engagement in online risk communication.

The Outrage Effect of Personal Stake, Effect on Children, Dread, and Controllability on COVID-19 Risk Perception Moderated by Media Use

ABSTRACT Public response to the COVID-19 pandemic provides a unique opportunity to study how lay people’s risk perception involves their emotive responses. We investigated how outrage factors as emotional responses to risk influence levels of risk perception in the context of the pandemic disease. Furthermore, how media use influences the perception of outrage factors is also examined. A nationwide online survey (n = 1,000) was conducted in South Korea. The survey results indicated that pandemic risk perception was connected to the generic intensity of perceived outrage factors as measured by averaging the perception of multiple outrage factors. Individual outrage factors such as personal stake, effect on children, dread, and controllability directly influenced risk perception regarding COVID-19. When the intensity of media use was considered, individuals with heavy media use perceived outrage factors more intensely than those who used media less frequently. Media use also moderated the outrage effect of catastrophic potential and moral nature on the perception of risk associated with the pandemic disease. For heavy media users, the outrage effect of moral nature was increased, while that of catastrophic potential decreased. The implications of the outrage effect on the pandemic disease risk perception are addressed. Finally, we discuss the meaning of heavy media users’ varying levels of vulnerability to outrage effect by moral nature and catastrophic potential.

Comparing the Effect of Declarative vs. Procedural Knowledge on Health Behavior Moderated by Outrage Factors

ABSTRACT Knowledge’s effect on behavioral responses in a health crisis has been a point of inquiry in many empirical studies that obtained significant findings. However, a variety of knowledge types has been considered in these studies rarely. This study compared the effect of declarative vs. procedural knowledge on behavioral responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, we examined whether outrage factors, which refer to perceived risk characteristics that are likely to elicit emotional responses, can moderate cognitive knowledge’s effect. Data were collected with a survey conducted five months after the first COVID-19 case was confirmed in South Korea. A total of 1,000 respondents completed questions on the two types of knowledge, risk perception, and health behaviors in the pandemic crisis, and three different outrage factors. The results showed that procedural knowledge on how-to-do something was associated significantly with the health behaviors in the crisis, while the declarative knowledge that involves knowing that “something is the case” was not. Further, the outrage factors moderated knowledge’s effect in such a way that procedural knowledge’s influence on health behaviors diminished when the respondents perceived that the pandemic was uncontrollable. On the other hand, procedural knowledge’s effect increased when the outrage factor of fairness was heightened. The implications are discussed in the context of studies of knowledge’s effect and the outrage factors’ moderation.

The Outrage Effect of Personal Stake, Familiarity, Effects on Children, and Fairness on Climate Change Risk Perception Moderated by Political Orientation.

Outrage factors are perceived characteristics of risk that provoke emotional responses and influence risk perception. Although several studies examined how multiple influences affect climate change risk perception, outrage factors have not been comprehensively assessed in the context of climate change risk perception. Using an online survey in South Korea (n = 592), we investigated outrage factors associated with climate change risk perception and whether political orientation moderates these outrage effects. We considered 11 of 20 outrage factors: voluntariness, controllability, familiarity, fairness, uncertainty, delayed effects, effects on children, trust, reversibility, personal stake, and human vs. natural origin. Factors that overlapped with the selected outrage factors or those that were not relevant to climate change were excluded. The survey revealed that the climate change risk perception of an individual increased when they perceived climate change to be relevant to their personal lives, when they felt unfamiliar with climate change, when they thought climate change would have a severe impact on children, or when they thought climate change would have unequal consequences. Moreover, respondents who identified as political conservatives were subject to a greater outrage effect of personal stake for climate change. The implications of the outrage effect on climate change risk perception and the greater vulnerability of conservatives to outrage effect are discussed.

Crisis Communication and Public Perception of COVID-19 Risk in the Era of Social Media.

A number of important principles in effective risk communication established in the late 20th century can provide important scientific insight into patient response to the risks posed by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Early risk communication scholars found acceptability of risk was shaped by 2 key components: hazard and outrage. The number of people who are exposed, infected, and fall ill can be considered the hazard. How the public and patients and respond to messages regarding risk mitigation relates to outrage. Social and cultural factors, immediacy, uncertainty, familiarity, personal control, scientific uncertainty, and trust in institutions and media all shape perception and response to risk mesaging. Outrage factors influence the ever-changing public understanding of COVID-19 risk. In concert, hazard and outrage along with cultural and economic context shape adherence to, and overall acceptance of, personal mitigation strategies including wearing facemasks and social distancing among the general public. The spread of misinformation on social media also provides both challenges and opportunities for clinicians. Social media offers an opportunity for experts to quickly convey true information about hazards, but offers others the opportunity to counter this with the spread of misinformation and exacerbate outrage. We propose strategies for infectious diseases clinicians to apply risk communication principles and frameworks to improve patient care and public message development in response to COVID-19.

The Outrage Effect of Personal Stake, Dread, and Moral Nature on Fine Dust Risk Perception Moderated by Media Use

ABSTRACT Outrage factors are perceived characteristics of risk that provoke emotional responses and influence risk perception by individuals. We investigated outrage factors that are associated with risk perception regarding fine dust. A nationwide online survey (N = 1,000) measured the magnitude of 14 perceived outrage factors and media use in a South Korean population. As a result, the hypothetical three outrage factors of personal stake, dread, and moral nature were found to be influential. The risk perception increased when people perceived that the environmental hazard has personal implications or is associated with fearful images and irresponsible government/corporate actions. The risk perception was also heightened when fine dust was thought to cause large-scale damage to many people simultaneously. Those using news media frequently showed higher risk perception than those using it less frequently. However, heavy media users were affected to a lesser degree by the outrage effects voluntariness and effects on children. The implications of the direct and indirect outrage effect are discussed in light of risk perception studies.

Comparing Outrage Effect on the Risk Perception of Climate Change versus Fine Dust

ABSTRACT Public evaluation of risk is influenced by the emotive response to perceived risk characteristics, namely outrage factors. We evaluated which outrage factors contribute to the public perception of two different environmental risks, climate change and fine dust. In particular, the outrage factors of controllability, familiarity, and delayed effect were assessed to determine if they are more salient and influential for climate change than fine dust. A nationwide online survey (N = 1,000) was conducted to measure nine outrage factors and risk perception for both risks in a South Korean population. Although both environmental risks were associated with a similar level of risk perception, catastrophic potential and personal stake were the highest scoring outrage factors for climate change and fine dust, respectively, and were also the strongest influence for the level of each risk perception. Familiarity was more salient for climate change than fine dust, and was influential only for climate change. Delayed effect was more salient for climate change, but was not influential for the perception of both risks. Controllability was more salient for fine dust but had no significant influence on both risk perceptions. Catastrophic potential, dread, personal stake, and trust were common influential outrage factors for both risks. We discuss the significance of an individualistic approach to evaluating outrage effects. In addition, the practical implications of comparing salient and influential outrage factors for both risks were addressed in terms of risk communication.

Outrage effects on food risk perception as moderated by risk attitude

For a deeper understanding of the dynamics of food risk perception, we examined the role of perceived outrage factors in guiding risk perception. Their interactions with risk attitude and media use were investigated as well. A nationwide survey (N = 1000) was conducted on five outrage factors (familiarity, trust, catastrophic potential, effects on children, and dread) with respect to four types of food risk (Benzopyrene in noodle soup, Norovirus in school cafeteria food, Misuse of plastic coffee bags, and Salmonella in infant food) in South Korea. The results confirmed that perceived outrage factors were overall positively associated with risk perception. Trust, catastrophic potential, and dread were associated with heightened risk perception regarding all of the four types of food risk. Familiarity and effect on children were also connected to a higher risk perception in two out of the four types of food risk. In addition, these outrage effects were partially moderated by risk attitude. Risk aversion attitudes weakened the association between perceived outrage factors (trust and catastrophic potential) and risk perception in three out of the four types of risk. The implication of the main outrage effect and its interaction with risk attitude was discussed in light of risk management.

Measuring outrage through a quantitative study of Iraqi immigrants in Michigan

AbstractObjectives: To measure the outrage towards five top hazards in Michigan of Iraqi immigrants from Sterling Heights and Dearborn, Michigan to enhance communication efforts. Methods: We recruited 84 Iraqi immigrants from two ACCESS community health and research facilities for this study. We utilized the Risk = Hazard + Outrage equation to measure outrage and total risk. Outrage was measured through a new survey instrument based off a list of nine outrage factors per hazard. We also used ANOVA to compare the hazards with each other and hazard and outrage levels. Results: Snowstorms were measured to be the highest outrage and power outages measured the lowest. Total risk was highest for snowstorms and lowest for pandemic influenza. Conclusions: The results measured outrage for each of the five Michigan hazards, showing what hazards Iraqi immigrants were most worried about. Because snowstorms were measured to have the highest outrage and overall measured risk, emergency preparedness and response profess...

What's the Beef in South Korea Protests?: The Technical, Psychometric, and Sociocultural Dimensions of News Coverage of Risk

ABSTRACTMillions of South Koreans took to the streets for more than 2 months in 2008 ostensibly in protest over their government's handling of beef imports from the United States. This study examines the technical, psychometric, and sociocultural dimensions of these public protests by conducting a content analysis of the coverage of the English language daily newspaper The Korea Herald. The results suggest that the scarcity of technical risk assessment information and the preponderance of normative or outrage factors in the newspaper's coverage (lack of trust in government, perceptions of inequity, and unequal benefits accruing to both nations) may have fueled public anxiety and anger. The findings also point to social, cultural, and historical factors that may explain why allowing U.S. beef into the Korean market elicited strong public reactions.

The Influence of Outrage Factors on Journalists’ Gatekeeping of Health Risks

Public risk perception is critical in understanding the modern “risk society,” and news media can be a significant influence on the perception. Based on Peter Sandman’s concept of “outrage factors” of risk, this study investigated whether these factors influence journalistic risk gatekeeping. A survey of 200 Korean journalists was conducted and results showed that the average outrage factors perceived by the reporters were influential in determining the degree of newsworthiness in all the cases across the five hazards. In particular, “catastrophic potential” was the most salient influence in that it was influential in three of the five hazards.

Outrage Factors in Government Press Releases of Food Risk and Their Influence on News Media Coverage

An appropriate level of risk perception should be a critical issue in modern “risk society.” There have been many studies on the influences on risk perception. This study investigates whether risk communication scholar Dr. Peter Sandman's outrage factors intensify journalistic attention to health risks from food consumption. A content analysis of a health institution's press releases was conducted to examine 15 outrage factors of food risks conveyed in the governmental risk communication. In addition, the news stories covering the food risks informed by the press releases were calculated to evaluate the relation between outrage factors of a risk and the number of news stories covering the risk. Results showed that controllability was the most salient outrage factor, followed by trust, voluntariness, familiarity, and human origin; the greater the outrage score of a risk, the more news stories of the risk. For individual outrage factors, a risk with an implication of catastrophic potential was associated with an increase of news stories. Food providers’ distrustful behaviors also influenced journalistic attention to the food risks. The implication of the findings to health message designers is discussed.

Affect-inducing risk communication: current knowledge and future directions

Affect appears to have a central role in people’s risk perception and decision-making. It is, therefore, important that researchers and communicators know how risk communication can induce affect or more specific emotions. In this paper, several studies that examined affect-inducing cues presented in and around risk communication are discussed. We thereby distinguish between integral affect induction, meaning through the risk message, and incidental affect induction, which occurs unintentional through the risk communication context. The following cues are discussed: emotion induction, fear appeals, outrage factors, risk stories, probability information, uncertainty information and graphs and images. Relatively few studies assessed the effect of their risk communication material on affect or specific emotions. Incidental affect induction appeared to occur more often than expected based on its factual content. Risk communication easily seems to induce affect incidentally and, thus, may be difficult to control. We, therefore, argue that incidental affect induction is more influential than integral affect induction. Implications for further research and risk communication in practice are given. Based on this overview, we strongly suggest considering and empirically assessing the affect-inducing potential of risk communication formats and content during their development and evaluation.

Using social media to navigate land access issues

Activist groups and others opposed to drilling operations have used social media with great effect to influence community perceptions of CSG and other mining operations. When faced with the reality of the level of community outrage apparent in social media, many industry executives throw their hands up in despair and conclude they cannot influence the discussion. Others decide that the best approach is to run broad-based advertising and PR campaigns that present only the industry's case–after all, this approach worked well for the mining industry in opposing the mining tax. Neither of these approaches actually addresses or mitigates the outrage that exists in the community or provides a hope of resolving the underlying issues. This extended abstract presents a staged approach to social media engagement using land access as an exemplar, which builds on more than a decade of risk communications experience and applies this to creating engagement and influence in the social media sphere. The approach has five stages. These stages involve: Listening–to key issues and influencers; Understanding–the expectations and outrage factors that emerge; Following–tracking how the conversations are evolving; Engaging–starting to participate in the conversations and only then; Influencing–having built a presence and a community you may start to shape the conversations. You may not always like what you read and hear in social media, but if you participate in a considered way you will get an accurate picture of community expectations and earn the right to help shape the conversations.

Risk perception and water fluoridation support and opposition in Australia

A considerable body of evidence confirms that water fluoridation effectively reduces the community incidence of dental caries with minimal side effects. However, proposals to introduce this widely endorsed public-health measure are often perceived as controversial, and public opinion frequently plays a role in the outcome. Despite this, the public's perception of risk associated with water fluoridation has not been well researched and remains poorly understood. Our objectives were to determine whether risk perceptions reflecting various "outrage" factors are associated with water fluoridation support and opposition. We conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire survey of a national sample of 517 Australian adults (response rate = 34.7 percent) aged 18-92 years. Approximately 70.5 percent of respondents supported water fluoridation, with 15.1 percent opposed and 14.3 percent neutral. Sixteen of the 20 assessed outrage factors were significantly associated with water fluoridation stance in the predicted direction, with greater outrage being related to increased water fluoridation opposition. An overall outrage index computed from the 16 significant outrage factors accounted for a statistically significant 58 percent of the variance in water fluoridation stance beyond the effects of age, gender, socioeconomic status, and age and presence of children. Outrage factors are important aspects of the public's perception of risk in relation to water fluoridation. Given that water fluoridation appears to be a low-risk, high-outrage controversy, efforts to mitigate the level of public outrage, rather than continuing to deny possible hazards, may offer a worthwhile strategy in gaining public acceptance for the extension of water fluoridation.

Invest In The Social Aspects of Biosolids Management

Social factors, such as public outrage, commonly interfere with effective biosolids management. This is especially true with programs that involve recycling biosolids to soils. Obstacles to public support of biosolids recycling are understood by application of social science research regarding risk perception, outrage factors, and risk communication. This paper covers background, summarizes past research, and presents short case studies regarding utilizing understanding of such social factors in particular biosolids management programs. Evaluations of these efforts are presented, providing improved understanding of how biosolids managers can implement cost-effective strategies to more effectively address the social aspects of biosolids management.

Outrage Factors and Explanations in News Coverage of the Anthrax Attacks

This content analysis examined risk communication factors in news coverage of the 2001 anthrax attacks appearing in 833 stories from 272 newspapers, AP, NPR, and four national television networks (CBS, NBC, CNN, ABC). An exploratory framework posits that when outrage factors characterize crisis coverage, accompanying explanations mitigate negative public reactions by putting the hazard into a broader context. Stories that portrayed uncertainty—through conflicting reports, speculation, use of unnamed sources, and coverage of vague advice and hoaxes/false alarms—frequently contained outrage rhetoric. However, speculative coverage often contained explanations that helped to contextualize frightening circumstances.

Consumer risk perceptions toward agricultural biotechnology, self-protection, and food demand: the case of milk in the United States.

This study is an econometric systems approach to modeling the factors and linkages affecting risk perceptions toward agricultural biotechnology, self-protection actions, and food demand. This model is applied to milk in the United States, but it can be adapted to other products as well as other categories of risk perceptions. The contribution of this formulation is the ability to examine how explanatory factors influence risk perceptions and whether they translate into behavior and ultimately what impact this has on aggregate markets. Hadden's outrage factors on heightening risk perceptions are among the factors examined. In particular, the article examines the role of labeling as a means of permitting informed consent to mitigate outrage factors. The effects of attitudinal, economic, and demographic factors on risk perceptions are also explored, as well as the linkage between risk perceptions, consumer behavior, and food demand. Because risk perceptions and self-protection actions are categorical variables and demand is a continuous variable, the model is estimated as a two-stage mixed system with a covariance correction procedure suggested by Amemiya. The findings indicate that it is the availability of labeling, not the price difference, between that labeled milk and milk produced with recombinant bovine Somatotropin (rbST) that significantly affects consumer's selection of rbST-free milk. The results indicate that greater availability of labeled milk would not only significantly increase the proportion of consumers who purchased labeled milk, its availability would also reduce the perception of risk associated with rbST, whether consumers purchase it or not. In other words, availability of rbST-free milk translates into lower risk perceptions toward milk produced with rbST.

A Model of Consumers' Risk Perceptions Toward Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rbGH): The Impact of Risk Characteristics

This study estimates the effect risk characteristics, described as outrage factors by Hadden, have on consumers' risk perceptions toward the food‐related biotechnology, recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH). The outrage factors applicable to milk from rbGH treated herds are involuntary risk exposure, unfamiliarity with the product's production process, unnatural product characteristics, lack of trust in regulator's ability to protectconsumers in the marketplace, and consumers' inability to distinguish milkfrom rbGH treated herds compared to milk from untreated herds. An empirical analysis of data from a national survey of household food shoppers reveals that outrage factors mediate risk perceptions. The results support the inclusion of outrage factors into the risk perception model for the rbGH product, as they add significantly to the explanatory power of the model and therefore reduce bias compared to a simpler model of attitudinal and demographic factors. The study indicates that outrage factors which have a significant impact on risk perceptions are the lack of trust in the FDA as afood‐related information source, and perceiving no consumer benefits from farmers' use of rbGH. Communication strategies to reduce consumer risk perceptions therefore could utilize agencies perceived as more trustworthy and emphasize the benefits of rbGH use to consumers.

A model of consumers' risk perceptions toward recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH): the impact of risk characteristics.

This study estimates the effect risk characteristics, described as outrage factors by Hadden, have on consumers' risk perceptions toward the food-related biotechnology, recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH). The outrage factors applicable to milk from rbGH treated herds are involuntary risk exposure, unfamiliarity with the product's production process, unnatural product characteristics, lack of trust in regulator's ability to protect consumers in the marketplace, and consumers' inability to distinguish milk from rbGH treated herds compared to milk from untreated herds. An empirical analysis of data from a national survey of household food shoppers reveals that outrage factors mediate risk perceptions. The results support the inclusion of outrage factors into the risk perception model for the rbGH product, as they add significantly to the explanatory power of the model and therefore reduce bias compared to a simpler model of attitudinal and demographic factors. The study indicates that outrage factors which have a significant impact on risk perceptions are the lack of trust in the FDA as a food-related information source, and perceiving no consumer benefits from farmers' use of rbGH. Communication strategies to reduce consumer risk perceptions therefore could utilize agencies perceived as more trustworthy and emphasize the benefits of rbGH use to consumers.