Studies of risk communication examining channels emphasize the mass versus interpersonal dichotomy. This approach has not produced entirely consistent results and has neglected to consider other potential attributes of channels. This article presents and evaluates a model featuring cost and expected utility as fundamental aspects of communication channels. Within a case involving risk communication, people are shown to relate channel cost and expected utility to their evaluation of channel usefulness. Recommendations are made for how these concepts might be developed in future research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adelman, M. B.
, and A. C. Ahuvia. 1991. Mediated channels for mate-seeking: A solution for involuntary singlehood?Critical Studies in Mass Communication8 (3): 273-289.
2.
Berger, C. R.
, and S. H. Chaffee. 1988. On bridging the communication gap. Human Communication Research15:311-318.
3.
Brown, R. B.
, and R. Herring. 1996. The need to eat: The psychological and philosophical components of bounded rationality. Science Communication18 (2): 116-130.
4.
Chaffee, S. H.
1986. Mass media and interpersonal channels: Competitive, convergent, or complimentary? In Inter/media: Interpersonal communication in a media world, 3d ed., edited by Gary Gumpert and Robert Cathcart, 62-80. New York: Oxford University Press.
5.
Chaffee, S. H.
1991. Communication concepts 1: Explication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6.
Chess, C.
, K. L. Salomone, B. J. Hance, and A. Saville. 1995. Results of a national symposium on risk communication: Next steps for government agencies. Risk Analysis15 (2): 115-125.
7.
Coleman, C.1993. The influence of mass media and interpersonal communication on societal and personal risk judgments. Communication Research20:611-628.
8.
Coleman, J. S.
1990. Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9.
Coleman, J. S.
, and T. J. Fararo, eds. 1992. Rational choice theory: Advocacy and critique. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10.
Collins-Jarvis, L.1997. Participation and consensus in collective action organizations: The influence of interpersonal versus mass-mediated channels. Journal of Applied Communication Research25 (1): 1-16.
11.
Covello, V. T.
1992. Risk communication: An emerging area of health communication research. In Communication yearbook, Vol. 15, edited by John A. Anderson, 359-373. New Brunswick, NJ: International Communication Association.
12.
Covello, V.
, D. von Winterfeldt, and P. Slovic. 1986. Risk communication: A review of the literature. Risk Abstracts3 (4): 171-182.
13.
Dhume, N.
, S. Dunwoody, M. Kanarek, and K. Bro. 1995. Predictors of channel exposure and of topic-specific attention to messages about risk. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, 9-12 August, Washington, DC.
14.
Dunwoody, S.
, and K. Neuwirth. 1991. Coming to terms with the impact of communication on scientific and technological risk judgments. In Risky business: Communicating issues of science, risk and public policy, edited by Lee Wilkins and Philip Patterson, 11-30. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
15.
Gigerenzer, G.
, and D. G. Goldstein. 1996. Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review103 (4): 650-669.
16.
Goodman, R. I.1992. The selection of communication channels by the elderly to obtain information. Educational Gerontology18 (7): 701-714.
17.
Hafstad, A.
, L. E. Aaro, and F. Langmark. 1996. Evaluation of an anti-smoking mass media campaign targeting adolescents: The role of affective responses and interpersonal communication. Health Education Research11 (1): 29-38.
18.
Hawkins, R. P.
, J. M. Wiemann, and S. Pingree, eds. 1988. Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal processes. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19.
Horaguchi, H.1996. The role of information processing cost as the foundation of bounded rationality in game theory. Economics Letters51 (3): 287-294.
20.
Keeley-Dyreson, M.
, J. Burgoon, and W. Bailey. 1991. The effects of stress and gender on nonverbal decoding accuracy in kinesic and vocalic channels. Human Communication Research17 (4): 584-605.
21.
Lazarsfeld, P.F.
, B. Berelson, and H. Gaudet. 1944. The people's choice. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce.
22.
Lipman, B. L.1995. Information processing and bounded rationality: A survey. The Canadian Journal of Economics28 (1): 42-67.
23.
Martinelli, K. A.
, and S. H. Chaffee. 1995. Measuring new-voter learning via three channels of political information. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly72 (1): 18-32.
24.
Mazur, A.
, and G. S. Hall. 1990. Effects of social influence and measured exposure level on response to radon. Sociological Inquiry60 (3): 274-284.
25.
McCallum, D. B.
, S. L. Hammond, and V. T. Covello. 1991. Communicating about environmental risks: How the public uses and perceives information sources. Health Education Quarterly18 (3): 349-361.
26.
Myers, R. K.1994. Interpersonal and mass media communication: Political learning in New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation presidential primary. Sociological Spectrum14 (2): 143-166.
27.
Narain, D.1992. Elites and their channels of communication. Indian Journal of Social Research33 (3): 69-78.
28.
Neuwirth, K.
, and S. Dunwoody. 1994. Channel access cost and perceived utility as predictors of exposure and attention to HIV information. Paper presented to the Midwest Association for Public Opinion Research, 21-22 November, Chicago.
29.
Park, E.
, C. Scherer, and C. Glynn. 1996. Mass media, interpersonal communication and real-life factors in risk perception at personal and societal levels. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, 10-13 August, Anaheim, CA.
30.
Perse, E. M.
and J. A. Courtwright. 1993. Normative images of communication media. Mass and interpersonal channels in the new media environment. Human Communication Research19 (4): 485-503.
31.
Reardon, K. K.
, and E. M. Rogers. 1988. Interpersonal versus mass communication: A false dichotomy. Human Communication Research15:284-303.
32.
Rule, J. B.
1997. Theory and progress in social science. New York: Cambridge University Press.
33.
Schmitt-Beck, R.1994. Intermediation environments of West German and East German voters: Interpersonal communication and mass communication during the first all-German election campaign. European Journal of Communication9 (4): 381-420.
34.
Simon, H. A.1956. Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review63:129-138.
35.
Simon, H. A.
1983. Reason in human affairs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
36.
Trumbo, C.1996. Examining psychometrics and polarization in a single-risk case study. Risk Analysis16 (3): 423-432.
37.
Trumbo, C.
1997a. Differential information processing across levels of arousal in a risk controversy. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Society for Risk Analysis, 7-10 December, Washington, DC.
38.
Trumbo, C.
1997b. Heuristic-systematic information processing and judgment of environmental risk. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Science Interest Group, 30 July-2 August, Chicago.
39.
Trumbo, C.
1997c. Reasons why: Describing polarized orientations toward perception of environmental risk. Paper presented at the third bi-annual Conference on Communication and Environment, 27-29 July, Cazanovia, NY.
40.
Tyler, T. R.
, and F. L. Cook. 1984. The mass media and judgments about risk: Distinguishing impact on personal and societal level judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology47 (4): 693-708.
41.
Valente, T. W.
, P. R. Poppe, and A. P. Merritt. 1996. Mass-media-generated interpersonal communication as sources of information about family planning. Journal of Health Communication1 (3): 247-266.
42.
Watson, J.
, and A. Hill. 1993. A dictionary of communication and media studies. 3d ed.New York: Edward Arnold.
