Topic

Examination of the knowledge and effects of information activities in the field of mobile telecommunications and determination of further approaches to improve information of different population groups

Start

01.10.2004

End

30.09.2005

Project Management

DIALOGIK gGmbH

Objective

The objective of this project was to provide the parties involved in risk communication with practical advice based on a scientific survey of public awareness and effects of information and communication measures.

Results

The research project was essentially divided into two project phases.

1. Empirical review of the studies available on the perception of mobile communication and its risks, meta- and media-analysis

The first step was an analysis of the quantitative and qualitative studies available on the perception and public opinion of mobile telecommunications. In order to ensure that the results are congruent, a meta-analysis was performed to verify the correspondence of the findings. A media-analysis served to identify the relevant parties in the mobile communications discussion and their communication messages. This preparatory research was the basis for elaborating the questionnaire and moderating the focus groups in the empirical part of the project.

2. Investigation of the information culture in the field of mobile telecommunications

In the empirical part of this research project both qualitative and quantitative procedures used in the social sciences were employed.

A qualitative survey was supposed to clarify if and to what extent the views of the public are in agreement with those of the authors, organisers and allocators of information and/or communication measures with respect to the objectives, contents and channels of such information or communication. To this end, five focus groups were formed, three of which consisted of citizens with different preconceptions of the research subject “mobile phone radiation”. One group was made up of unconcerned people who considered mobile phone radiation as rather harmless (the unworried). A second group consisted of people feeling rather uncertain about mobile phone radiation, who have not formed an opinion on this topic or are still undecided (the unsure). The third group was made up of people worrying about the radiation exposure caused by electromagnetic fields (the worried). The first expert focus group comprised politicians, media representatives and scientists (the experts I), while the second group was made up of representatives from the mobile communications industry and citizens’ initiatives/environmental groups (the experts II). The discussions within the focus groups followed a guideline, addressing the topics of how the participants assess previous risk communication efforts, what communication channels are used or might be used later on and what options the participants see to improve the communication.

The groups also evaluated concrete information measures taken by the parties from the political field (including materials issued by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection as an example), the scientific field, the mobile communications industry and citizens’ initiatives/environmental groups (print materials, internet pages). The evaluations performed by the three citizens’ focus groups and the expert focus groups showed similarities and differences of opinion.

The mobile phone survey 2005 (quantitative survey) was used to hold interviews with a total of 814 randomly selected German speaking members of the German population.

The survey was based on two samplings, a written questionnaire followed by a telephone survey. This quantitative survey helped make representative statements about the risk perception, status of information, informational behaviour, risk acceptance and the assessment of different communication strategies. The results were analysed in two ways, i.e. an analysis was performed on the results of the complete sampling and another one was performed for which the sampling was divided into the subgroups of the worried, the unsure and the unworried with the help of special questions about their preconception. The three subgroups showed distinctive differences with respect to the aspects mentioned above.

The report provides the parties involved with suggestions and recommendations for an improved risk communication on the basis of the results from the focus groups and the quantitative survey. The guideline presented addresses all parties involved in the discussion.

The group of the unworried, e.g., can best be reached with short, concise and catchy messages. Technical jargon should be replaced by everyday language. The appropriate channels for this type of information are the mass media (in particular print media) and product information, such as labels on mobile phones. A completely different strategy is needed to reach the worried. They are generally suspicious of the industry, the state and the scientific world. One-way communication is in most cases not appropriate for the groups of interested, committed and worried citizens. Only by way of dialogues and involvement can these people be motivated to be open to learn. Local information events or panel discussions are appropriate channels to establish open contact with the worried, in particular when it comes to siting conflicts. The group of the unsure can be found in between the other two groups. Information must be presented in a well-balanced and convincing style without giving the impression to be too complicated. The remaining uncertainties must be addressed in a comprehensive way. The unsure can be reached, like the unworried, via the mass media and product information. These groups accept practical hints with respect to precautions and health protection.

The final report, which comprises detailed results from the interim reports, is available as PDF-file (1,517 KB) in German.

Conclusions

The results gained from the focus groups and the mobile phone survey in 2005 illustrate the importance of differentiating between target groups. The essential differences but also potential similarities between the views of the different citizens’ groups and the experts have become apparent.

The authors of information and communication measures are invited to make use of these findings for their efforts of carefully harmonising the communication targets, messages, channels and receivers in order to enable an efficient exchange of information.