the model proposes that seven factors—(1) individual characteristics, (2) perceived hazard
characteristics, (3) affective response to the risk, (4) felt social pressures to possess relevant
information, (5) information sufficiency, (6) one’s personal capacity to learn, (7) beliefs about the
usefulness of information in various channels —will influence the extent to which a person will seek
out this risk information in both routine and nonroutine channels and the extent to which he or she
will spend time and effort analyzing the risk information critically.
According to the following models: Eagly and Chaiken’s Heuristic Systematic Model and Ajzen’s
Theory of Planned Behavior (The former helps us understand how people come to seek and attend to
information about a given risk, and the latter helps us understand how those communication
behaviors might ultimately affect individuals’ risk-related behaviors (e.g., adoption and maintenance
of preventive behaviors).)
people who engage in more effortful information seeking and processing are more likely to develop
risk-related cognitions, attitudes, and behaviors that are more stable (i.e., less changeable or volatile)
over time. Since most forms of health information campaigns attempt to get people to adopt
habitual or lifestyle changes, factors leading to the stability or volatility of those behavioral changes
are essential concerns.
Bottom-up approach: information providers are counseled to provide individuals with the types of
information they need rather than giving them only what others with expertise feel they should
have. Risk managers are advised to construct decision processes that incorporate all parties
influenced by a risky situation, not just those with the most social power. The bottom-up approach
assumes that the individual is a reasonable soul who, when it makes sense to do so, can become
engaged intellectually in the risk issue at hand. Instead of just asking how messages may influence
people, the bottom-up approach calls for a focus on understanding the evaluative behaviors of the
information user. Thus, we propose here a model of factors that may influence the ways in which
people seek and process risk information, and the ways that information seeking and processing
ultimately affect behaviors that people might adopt in the face of a specific health risk.
everyday reasoning strategies suggest that such strategies can be marred by incompleteness and
bias.
Petty and Cacioppo’s (1981) Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
Eagly and Chaiken’s (1993) Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM).
According to the HSM formulation, a person’s desire for sufficiency motivates systematic processing.
The sufficiency principle, state Eagly and Chaiken (1993), ‘‘asserts that people will exert whatever
effort is required to attain a ‘sufficient’ degree of confidence that they have accomplished their
processing goals’’ For example, the personal relevance of the message topic to the individual can
motivate people to do systematic processing of the message
Relevance elevates the amount of judgmental confidence people need to have (the ‘‘sufficiency
threshold’’) in their own attitudes (e.g., Do they square with relevant facts? Are they defensible? Are
they socially acceptable?) and/or the confidence they need to have in the validity of the message,
and it even affects their sensitivity to the reliability of statistically based information used in the
message.
, Figure 1 illustrates the variables of primary concern in our Model of Risk Information Seeking and
Processing. Specifically, we hypothesize that three factors—(1) information sufficiency, (2) perceived
information gathering capacity, and (3) relevant channel beliefs—will influence the extent to which a
person will seek out risk information in both routine and nonroutine channels and the extent to
which he or she will spend time and effort analyzing the risk information critically (i.e., systematically
rather than heuristically).
characteristics, (3) affective response to the risk, (4) felt social pressures to possess relevant
information, (5) information sufficiency, (6) one’s personal capacity to learn, (7) beliefs about the
usefulness of information in various channels —will influence the extent to which a person will seek
out this risk information in both routine and nonroutine channels and the extent to which he or she
will spend time and effort analyzing the risk information critically.
According to the following models: Eagly and Chaiken’s Heuristic Systematic Model and Ajzen’s
Theory of Planned Behavior (The former helps us understand how people come to seek and attend to
information about a given risk, and the latter helps us understand how those communication
behaviors might ultimately affect individuals’ risk-related behaviors (e.g., adoption and maintenance
of preventive behaviors).)
people who engage in more effortful information seeking and processing are more likely to develop
risk-related cognitions, attitudes, and behaviors that are more stable (i.e., less changeable or volatile)
over time. Since most forms of health information campaigns attempt to get people to adopt
habitual or lifestyle changes, factors leading to the stability or volatility of those behavioral changes
are essential concerns.
Bottom-up approach: information providers are counseled to provide individuals with the types of
information they need rather than giving them only what others with expertise feel they should
have. Risk managers are advised to construct decision processes that incorporate all parties
influenced by a risky situation, not just those with the most social power. The bottom-up approach
assumes that the individual is a reasonable soul who, when it makes sense to do so, can become
engaged intellectually in the risk issue at hand. Instead of just asking how messages may influence
people, the bottom-up approach calls for a focus on understanding the evaluative behaviors of the
information user. Thus, we propose here a model of factors that may influence the ways in which
people seek and process risk information, and the ways that information seeking and processing
ultimately affect behaviors that people might adopt in the face of a specific health risk.
everyday reasoning strategies suggest that such strategies can be marred by incompleteness and
bias.
Petty and Cacioppo’s (1981) Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
Eagly and Chaiken’s (1993) Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM).
According to the HSM formulation, a person’s desire for sufficiency motivates systematic processing.
The sufficiency principle, state Eagly and Chaiken (1993), ‘‘asserts that people will exert whatever
effort is required to attain a ‘sufficient’ degree of confidence that they have accomplished their
processing goals’’ For example, the personal relevance of the message topic to the individual can
motivate people to do systematic processing of the message
Relevance elevates the amount of judgmental confidence people need to have (the ‘‘sufficiency
threshold’’) in their own attitudes (e.g., Do they square with relevant facts? Are they defensible? Are
they socially acceptable?) and/or the confidence they need to have in the validity of the message,
and it even affects their sensitivity to the reliability of statistically based information used in the
message.
, Figure 1 illustrates the variables of primary concern in our Model of Risk Information Seeking and
Processing. Specifically, we hypothesize that three factors—(1) information sufficiency, (2) perceived
information gathering capacity, and (3) relevant channel beliefs—will influence the extent to which a
person will seek out risk information in both routine and nonroutine channels and the extent to
which he or she will spend time and effort analyzing the risk information critically (i.e., systematically
rather than heuristically).
