@article {bnh-3424, title = {Predicting risk-mitigating behaviors from indecisiveness and trait-anxiety: two cognitive pathways to task avoidance}, journal = {Journal of Personality}, volume = {84}, year = {2016}, month = {02/2016}, pages = {36-45}, chapter = {36}, abstract = {

Past research suggests that indecisiveness and trait anxiety may both decrease the likelihood of performing risk-mitigating preparatory behaviors (e.g., preparing for natural hazards) and suggests two cognitive processes (perceived control and worrying) as potential mediators. However, no single study to date has examined the influence of these traits and processes together. Examining them simultaneously is necessary to gain an integrated understanding of their relationship with risk-mitigating behaviors. We therefore examined these traits and mediators in relation to wildfire preparedness in a two-wave field study among residents of wildfire-prone areas in Western Australia (total\ N = 223). Structural equation modeling results showed that indecisiveness uniquely predicted preparedness, with higher indecisiveness predicting lower preparedness. This relationship was fully mediated by perceived control over wildfire-related outcomes. Trait anxiety did not uniquely predict preparedness or perceived control, but it did uniquely predict worry, with higher trait anxiety predicting more worrying. Also, worry trended toward uniquely predicting preparedness, albeit in an unpredicted positive direction. This shows how the lack of performing risk-mitigating behaviors can result from distinct cognitive processes that are linked to distinct personality traits. It also highlights how simultaneous examination of multiple pathways to behavior creates a fuller understanding of its antecedents.

}, doi = {10.1111/jopy.12135}, url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jopy.12135/abstract}, author = {Ilona M McNeill and Patrick Dunlop and T.C. Skinner and David Morrison} } @article {bnh-3423, title = {A value and expectancy based approach to understanding residents{\textquoteright} intended response to a wildfire threat}, journal = {International Journal of Wildland Fire}, volume = {25}, year = {2016}, month = {03/2016}, abstract = {

To motivate residents to evacuate early in case of a wildfire threat, it is important to know what factors underlie their response-related decision-making. The current paper examines the role of the value and expectancy tied to potential outcomes of defending vs evacuating on awareness of a community fire threat. A scenario study among 339 Western Australians revealed that residents intending to leave immediately on awareness of a community fire threat differ from those not intending to leave immediately in both value and expectancy. For one, intended leavers were more likely than those intending to defend their property to have children. Also, the data showed a trend towards intended leavers being less likely to have livestock. Furthermore, intended leavers placed less importance on the survival of their property than those with other expressed intentions. They also reported lower expectancies regarding the likelihood of achieving positive outcomes by defending than those intending to defend or wait and see before deciding what to do. Finally, intended leavers perceived it more likely that they would avoid harm to their pets by evacuating than those intending to defend throughout or wait and see. These findings have important implications for strategies to influence residents{\textquoteright} response-related decision-making.

}, doi = {10.1071/WF15051}, url = {http://www.publish.csiro.au/wf/WF15051}, author = {Ilona M McNeill and Patrick Dunlop and T.C. Skinner and David Morrison} } @article {bnh-1810, title = {Predicting delay in residents{\textquoteright} decisions on defending v. evacuating through antecedents of decision avoidance}, journal = {International Journal of Wildland Fire}, volume = {24}, year = {2015}, month = {032015}, pages = {153-161}, type = {Journal}, chapter = {153}, abstract = {

Many residents of at-risk areas delay committing to defence or evacuation as their response to wildfire threat. This study compared several plausible causes of decision delay and determined that householders{\textquoteright} delay was best predicted by the difference in perceived values of defending\ v.\ evacuating, resulting in decision delay when both options get closer in attractiveness.

}, doi = {10.1071/WF12213}, url = {http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/114/paper/WF12213.htm}, author = {Ilona M McNeill and Patrick Dunlop and T.C. Skinner and David Morrison} } @article {BF-4307, title = {Communicating Risk Information Processing Under Stress: Community Reactions - project report 2012-2013}, year = {2014}, month = {2014}, pages = {1-74}, abstract = {The Information Processing Under Stress: Community Reactions project sits within the research stream called {\textquoteleft}Communicating Risk{\textquoteright}. The project has a focus on increasing our understanding of how residents living in bushfire prone areas can be motivated to prepare better for the bushfire season and make better decisions when a fire threatens their community. The project entails a variety of research phases that aim to answer questions such as {\textquoteleft}Why do so many people anticipate responding indecisively when a fire threatens their community?{\textquoteright}, {\textquoteleft}Why do people fail to properly prepare for the fire season even when they intend to do so at the start?{\textquoteright}, {\textquoteleft}How can information and feedback regarding residents{\textquoteright} preparedness best be presented to them to motivate them to prepare further?{\textquoteright} and {\textquoteleft}Does the effectiveness of certain message framings in heightening preparedness levels depend on person characteristics?{\textquoteright}. More specific, the project contains 8 phases of quantitative research, which all focus on different factors, both situational (e.g., message framing) and personality (e.g., high versus low anxiety individuals) based, that may be linked to people{\textquoteright}s motivation, expectations, and information processing, and influence their subsequent decision making and actions. The main goal of these 8 phases of research is to gather a better understanding of what preparedness is, how different types of information may influence people{\textquoteright}s willingness to prepare, and how different people may react differently to the same piece of information. }, author = {Ilona M McNeill and Patrick Dunlop and T.C. Skinner and David Morrison} } @article {BF-4377, title = {Testing the Effectiveness of Task Difficulty, Behaviour Interpretation, and Social Comparison Interventions on Bushfire Preparedness {\textendash} An Experimental Field Study}, year = {2014}, abstract = {Researchers at the University of Western Australia explored whether three different interventions had an effect on preparedness intentions at the start of the bushfire season and actual preparedness towards the end of the bushfire season for both property preparedness and psychological planning. These manipulations included A. asking residents of bushfire prone areas to focus on completing easy vs. difficult preparatory tasks first, B. influencing residents{\textquoteright} perceptions of how much they have done to prepare to date compared to others in Australia, and C. asking residents to interpret their level of bushfire preparedness to date in terms of commitment or progress towards the goal of being prepared. Results suggest that making residents focus on the three easiest tasks first leads to greater intentions to complete uncompleted planning tasks than focusing on the three most difficult tasks first, but it had no influence on actual preparedness by the end of the season. Results also showed that residents who thought about how much progress they had made towards the goal of being prepared showed lower intentions to engage in more tasks that prepare their properties than those who thought about how committed they were towards the goal of being prepared. However, thinking about their progress towards the goal of being prepared led residents to complete more psychological planning tasks than thinking about how committed they were.}, author = {Ilona M McNeill and Huw Flatau Harrison and Patrick Dunlop and T.C. Skinner and David Morrison} } @proceedings {BF-4350, title = {Are you ready? Ready for what? {\textendash} Examining intended fire responses and preparedness by residents of fire prone areas}, year = {2013}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/resources/research-report/are-you-ready-ready-what-\%E2\%80\%93-examining-intended-fire-responses-and-preparedn}, author = {Ilona M McNeill and Patrick Dunlop and T.C. Skinner and David Morrison} }