RESEARCH
Risk controversies are rarely just problems of information. They emerge from differences in how people interpret risk, from the systems through which communication takes place, and from the concepts and assumptions that shape research and policy.
My theoretical and empirical research uses mixed methods to investigate how societies communicate, interpret, and govern risk amid technological innovation, political controversy, and environmental change.
Rethinking risk communication
for complex and contested challenges
Three questions drive my research
Why do we disagree about risk?
INTEGRATION
Integrating psychological, sociocultural, and institutional perspectives on risk
People do not encounter risks in a vacuum. How we interpret them is shaped by affect, trust, experience, and other psychological processes, but also by culture, values, institutions, place, and history. My research brings these perspectives together to explain why people and groups can interpret the same risks differently, and what those differences mean for communication, engagement, and decision-making.
Pharmaceutical benefits and risks
How can we tackle complex risk communication problems?
SYSTEMS
A systems-level approach to communication across actors, contexts, and stages of decision-making
Risk communication research often isolates individual messages, messengers, audiences, or effects. Complex societal challenges rarely work that way. I examine how communication unfolds across interconnected people, organizations, institutions, and decision processes. Looking across the wider system can reveal why communication problems persist, where change is possible, and which strategies may work better in practice.
What do our core communication concepts really mean?
CONCEPTS
Unpacking the concepts that underpin communication, policy, and public understanding
Some of the most familiar ideas in risk communication are also among the least straightforward. Concepts such as transparency, misinformation, uncertainty, hazard, and risk can mean different things to different people and carry important assumptions about audiences, evidence, and communication. I unpack these concepts, examine how they operate in practice, and use those insights to rethink research, communication strategies, and public policy.
