10 recommendations about effective strategies
An Australian team combined their expertise in psychology, sociology, policy studies and public health to review the literature on communication strategies during a pandemic and make 10 recommendations on effective government crisis communication strategies. Their paper expands on their contribution to the Group of Eight Australia’s report for the Australian Government, COVID-19 Roadmap to Recovery: A report to the nation (bit.ly/3dasswt).
The report highlights that gaining high levels of public trust is central to communication during a pandemic. This includes having shared values and confidence that future developments will occur as expected. Community engagement is necessary to identify shared values and to involve communities in the decisions that will affect them, which in turn is more likely to facilitate public cooperation.
The authors urge governments to prioritise transparency in the information presented and the decision-making process. This includes disclosing who was consulted, what evidence was used to inform public health recommendations and what scenarios and trade-offs were considered.
The 10 recommendations
1. Engage in clear communication.
It is important for compliance and reducing anxiety during a crisis to provide specific information on what the public are required to do and not do, including giving specific actions, time periods and any changes to restrictions. Messages will be more effective if there is coordinated communication with consistent messages and terminology across different channels. Regular communication across many channels will help to build trust.
2. Strive for maximum credibility.
For persuasive communication, credibility is needed and can be achieved by leveraging trusted intermediaries such as medical and public-health experts to communicate key messages (e.g., Chief Medical Officers). The public is more likely to support policies if they have been advanced by trusted public health officials and if they can see they are underpinned by appropriate evidence, expert consensus and apolitical guidance. However, public trust in experts is not automatic and health organisations and professionals need to find ways to enhance public trust.
3. Communicate with empathy.
Effective leaders need to be able to listen to the community’s needs and concerns and express genuine empathy. Leaders can identify ways to alleviate hardships, such as incorporating anecdotes of specific people’s experiences into their messages. They can communicate that they trust the public and they can praise the sector of people on the frontline.
4. Communicate with openness, frankness and honesty.
Open and honest communication will help people to understand the rationale for the advice so that they are more likely to follow it. This includes explaining why particular actions are necessary or problematic and on what basis decisions are made. Providing enough information to be appropriately worried (not scared), helps build proper expectations and facilitates protective behaviour. Early communication about change will help maintain trust and can reduce the tendency of the public to look for information elsewhere.
5. Recognise that uncertainty is inevitable.
Where possible, the public need some certainty to help them prepare pragmatically and mentally, but this should be realistic, without over-assurance. When new evidence emerges which changes direction of crisis management, the conflict between the old and new information can be pointed out and the uncertainties can be acknowledged.
6. Account for levels of health literacy and numeracy.
The authors recommend the use of both qualitative and quantitative estimates of risk and the use of simple frequencies and consistent denominators to compare probabilities. However, in some cases use of simple numbers can promote a false sense of security and a different estimate (e.g., reproduction number) may need to be explained in lay terms. It is important to frame the utility of models accurately to proactively counter misconceptions that ‘the models were wrong’.
7. Empower people to act.
It is important to consider practical and psychological barriers to desired behaviour and to facilitate access to the resources needed to act. The way a message is framed has a big influence on empowerment such as ‘we are on the road to recovery…’ rather than ‘calm down’. Messages can also appeal to public solidarity, a sense of togetherness and the public’s capacity to act. The involvement of community groups, businesses and organisations also facilitate action such as the social distancing and hygiene practices adopted by retail outlets.
8. Appeal to social norms.
It is important to engage with communities to develop targeted strategies that appeal to social norms so that a balance can be reached in creating a sense of responsibility towards others while not aliening those who do not identify with those norms.
9. Consider diverse community needs.
Information needs to be made accessible in various ways, there needs to be timely translation of core communication into different languages, cultural sensitivity is required and there needs to be ways for people with disabilities to access preventative measures. Engaging with key groups and trusted community leaders will aid this process.
10. Be proactive in combating misinformation.
Being transparent in providing factual and current information helps prevent subsequent susceptibility to misinformation. When a piece of misinformation gains traction, it is advisable to inoculate the broader population by scrutinising the misinformation, pointing out the errors in it and the motivation behind its spread and reminding people to think carefully about the accuracy of online information and the credibility of its source before sharing it on social media.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00701-w