CHANDLER-The role of first language reversion in communication and outreach

The Role of First Language Reversion
In Communication and Outreach
An Integrative, Multilingual Approach
By Robert C. Chandler, Ph.D., Director
Nicholson School of Communication
University of Central Florida (UCF), USA
5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014
‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland
www.grforum.org

www.grforum.org
2
Crisis Communication Preparedness
• During a natural disaster, industrial
accident, pandemic or other crisis,
successful incident notification and
communication are critical to
preserving life, health and safety
• Breakdowns in communication
(inbound/outbound) during such
emergencies can have tragic widespread
consequences
• Effective communication must consider
not only how messages are distributed,
but also how messages are understood
by those experiencing fear, panic,
anxiety and heightened stress

www.grforum.org
3
Common Communication Breakdowns and Failures
Typical onsets of high stress and hyper-stress during crisis are caused by:
• Sleep deprivation
• Sensory overstimulation
• Physical discomfort
• Fear, dread, ongoing uncertainty
• Isolation, grief
• Incessant pressure due to threats
or time-clock countdowns

www.grforum.org
4
Human Cognitive Processes Impacted by Crisis
Crisis stress can, at least temporarily, impact the following:
• Reaction time
• Ability to mentally focus, and to perceive and comprehend information,
leading to inattention
• Message loading: Number of message variables that can be received,
considered and processed
• General command of vocabulary
• Changes in speech processing; ability to accurately elaborate and relay messages
• Primary language orientation: Occasional, unpredictable reversion to first
language, or “mother tongue,” in speaking, hearing and thinking
This is one of the more surprising, dramatic, unsettling experiences reported by disaster victims and
emergency responders related to cognitive function during extreme crisis. That they are bilingual (or
multilingual), and that this function temporarily completely suspends its normal cognitive operation
during high stress and hyper stress possibly presents an interesting, key finding useful to the study of
crisis communication

www.grforum.org
5
For all audiences, including those fluent in one language only,
crisis communication must take into account the effect of crisis
on cognitive abilities and how they are typically impacted during
each phase of crisis onset, management and resolution.
Cognitive abilities:
• Typically decrease as crisis stress increases
Cognitive processes, involve:
• Thinking
• Reasoning
• Remembering
• Imagining
• Learning
People possess individual cognitive abilities and limitations,
which additionally affect decision-making capabilities in a crisis

Crisis stress can affect critical operational attitudes and behaviors, such as:
www.grforum.org
6
In crisis communication,
contending with such important variables
requires multiple communication cues,
messages, and interaction
• Situational Awareness:
− Ability to accurate perceive and understand one’s circumstances and surroundings
(or, knowing what is going on so you can figure out what to do)
• Risk Perception:
− Ability to accurately perceive the present or future level of risk or danger
Communicating risk is one of the more complex but important tasks during a crisis

Low Stress High Stress
www.grforum.org
7
Diminished
Cognitive Abilities
Normal
Cognitive Abilities
The Spectrum of Cognitive Abilities
Recipients process an
average of 7messages
per communication
episode
Information processed
at the
“average” grade level
(about 10th Grade, in
the general population)
Information processed at
an average of -4grade
levels, in the general
population
Recipients process an
average of 3 messages
per communication episode
• Routine misinterpretation
• Routine misunderstanding
• Assumptions
• Sequential Errors
• Increased confusion
• Inability to focus
• Easily distracted
• Increased misinterpretation
• Increased number of misunderstandings
• Unable to complete complex critical thinking

www.grforum.org
8
Crisis Life Cycle Analysis
Every stage of the crisis dictates your audience’s
requirements and your response:
1. The Warning Stage
What do we communicate?
When?
How do we say it?

www.grforum.org
9
2. The Risk Assessment Stage
When?
How do we say it?

www.grforum.org
10
3. The Response Stage
When?
How do we say it?

www.grforum.org
11
4. The Management Stage
When?
How do we say it?

www.grforum.org
12
5. The Resolution Stage
When?
How do we say it?

www.grforum.org
13
6. The Recovery Stage
When?
How do we say it?

www.grforum.org
14
Lost in Translation?
An emerging area of interest for disaster communication researchers is that
of target populations proficient or fluent in more than one language.
Much crisis communication strategy can be easy to lose in translation:
• Crisis is tied to fear, dread, uncertainty, fatigue, pressure to act, frustration,
impulsivity or reticence, and other feelings
• Such stressors evoke heightened, variable emotional and physiological
responses. They can cause “freeze,” “flight,” “shutdown” or other behaviors
• Linguistic studies show that language is tied to emotion

www.grforum.org
15
Language Research Terminology
Category Description
First language (L1) A language that a person is as proficient in as an average native individual who
speaks no other language but that language. Sometimes called “native
language” or “mother tongue”
Second language (L2) Any language learned after the first language or native language in which
varying levels of proficiency is achieved. Sometimes called “auxiliary language.”
Simultaneous bilingualism Occurs when a person becomes bilingual by learning two languages
at the same time
Sequential bilingualism Occurs when a person becomes bilingual by first learning one language, and
then another
Language attrition Loss of a first or second language or a portion of L2 language skills by
individuals
Limited English Proficiency (LEP) The inability to communicate effectively in English because a person’s first
language is not English
Foreign Language Anxiety (FLA) Apprehension associated with a non-native speaker of a second language

www.grforum.org
16
Lost in Translation?
Needs of Aging Multilingual Populations:
• Language is also an important issue for areas where there is a growing aging
population among whom are those who speak more than one language.
• There can be a shift to first language in the elderly, under even everyday
conditions, among those who have been proficient in a second, later-learned
language
− Those who are more home-bound or isolated. (Bilingual couples begin to
prefer communicating in first language, over time)
− Those beginning to suffer from cognitive decline, due to:
• Alzheimer’s disease
• Conditions of normal advanced aging that impact cognitive processing

www.grforum.org
17
Related Issues
• Individuals who do not speak English as their primary language and who have a
limited ability to read, speak, write, or understand English can be limited English
proficient, or "LEP."
− These individuals may be entitled language assistance with respect to a
particular type or service, benefit, or encounter (LEP.gov)
• In the USA most emergency messaging is primarily in
English, even in geographic regions where there are
predominate non-English speakers, limited English
proficiency speakers, and where English is spoken
largely as a second language.

www.grforum.org
18
Preliminary Survey
Among Crisis Communication Practitioners
In a 2011 poll, surveys were collected from 100 international crisis practitioners.
Research sample comprised L2 English speakers from the USA and Thailand, who
participated in answering these two questions:
1. To what extent do L2 speakers report instances of L1 reversion during high
cognitive stress contexts which affected their ability to perceive, select, decode,
understand/comprehend, process, or respond to communication (messages
received) in L2 language?
2. To what extent do L2 speakers report instances of L1 reversion during high
cognitive stress contexts which affected their ability to encode, speak, write, or
communicate (messages) in L2 language?

www.grforum.org
19
Key Survey Findings
• Roughly 78% of bilinguals in this survey reported that they do have
language reversion under some level of crisis severity
The below cognitive processes were anticipated by those surveyed to possibly
or likely be affected in terms of language reversion during crisis:
• Thinking
• Recalling key information
• Situation analysis
• Understanding complex concepts
• Assessing Risks
• Making Decisions
• Determining reactions
• Changing course of action
• Crisis communication resource:
− Bilingual individuals surveyed rely primarily on televised media, for their
crisis communication needs

www.grforum.org
20
Compounding the Language Issue:
Jargon, Context, Unfamiliar Phenomena…
Some survey respondents volunteered that they had experienced difficulty during a
crisis situation in interpreting (from English messaging) key data about such issues as
type of threat and threat level due to vocabulary specific to the crisis situation or
disaster response concepts (“threat level orange,” for example) that at the time was
missing from their second-language vocabulary.
Language choice will always require consideration over jargon and context issues as
key challenge areas in crisis communication planning.
• For example, newcomers to a geographic area may not have knowledge of the
type of natural disasters which occur in their new location, and therefore not
have a frame of reference from which to make decisions during a weather-related
disaster.
− Floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc., may be foreign and unknown
phenomena to certain migrant communities, for example, requiring
preventative communication outreach to any linguistically isolated
communities that reside in disaster-prone areas.

www.grforum.org
21
Even for fluent bilinguals, medical terminology may, of course, not be an area of
high fluency
• Pandemic/epidemic communication especially will be critically important to
address in related research. This is vital for the common good, regardless of
political and logistical barriers:
− During pandemic, every person who may be in contact with pathogens will be not
only a potential victim, but also possibly a potential vector (or carrier) of deadly
disease pathogens, should proper precautions fail to be understood and followed

www.grforum.org
22
In addition, for many single-language individuals medical terminology may not be
teachable via the printed word
• Communication strategy for pandemic
must also be advised by current
knowledge on creating effective
health-related materials designed for
all audiences, including those who are
not able to not read.
− Literacy issues are often hidden,
undisclosed, and significantly
widespread. This may be particularly
true in highly populated communities,
which may have areas lacking
education resources, and/or other
factors for low literacy.
http://www.cdc.gov/healthliteracy/pdf/simply_put.pdf

www.grforum.org
23
Proactive emergency messaging strategy
addresses populations’ language-related needs
Population demographics involving
language are changing worldwide.
Meanwhile, available options for
emergency messaging and crisis
information are also
changing/reducing for many
audiences
• Emerging media channels not available
to all audiences
• Analog TV for basic media reception,
now difficult/missing
• Triple-digit-cost for average monthly TV
service cost
• Radio/media emergency reporting
responsibility issues (political, security-related,
regulatory issues)
Hispanic or Latino Population as a Percent of
Total Population by County: 2010
(U.S. Census)
SOURCES and more information:
http://www.pewhispanic.org/
http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acs-22.pdf
http://www.fcc.gov/document/
pshsb-extends-comment-period-eb-docket-no-04-296-public-notice

30%
www.grforum.org
24
Proactive emergency messaging strategy
addresses populations’ language-related needs
As of 2011, up to 30% of U.S.
individuals who speak a
language other than English at
home say that, under
everyday circumstances, they
speak English either
“Not Well” or “Not at all.”
Combining this vulnerable
population segment with
fluent bilinguals who may
experience first-language
reversion during a crisis, the
argument for multi-language
emergency messaging
capability grows.

www.grforum.org
25
A Sampling of What These Numbers Mean in the U.S.,
By State

www.grforum.org
26
2011 U.S. Census: Among Spanish-speaking citizens, those
who know they speak English less than very well is large
A possibly useful new
interactive tool on the U.S.
Census Bureau’s website is
the 2011 Language
Mapper. It is possible to
select a language and subset
(in this case “Spanish-speaking
population who
speak English less than very
well”), then zoom in to a
region for details. In this view,
each colored dot represents
approximately 100 people.
Crisis planners can potentially
use this tool as one part of
researching language needs,
especially in most densely
populated areas. (link below)
http://www.census.gov/hhes/socd
emo/language/data/language_ma
p.html
See next page

www.grforum.org
27
Enlarged example: Central Florida, USA Area
This View: One dot = approximately 10 people

In planning crisis communication messaging:
• Know your various audiences
• Know how they are changing
• Know how they are able to receive messages
• Know how they will likely be interpreting (and sharing) messages,
including their access (and lack thereof) to various communication channels
www.grforum.org
28
Key Recommendations
Some key planning factors:
• Densely populated areas are at high risk during disaster, and most urban populations will
have varying language proficiencies and needs
• Some groups are completely isolated linguistically (some migrant groups; homeless
populations, etc.)
• More isolated aging populations, if bilingual, will often shift to first language
• Literacy rates, and corresponding need for relevantly designed communication plans
• Statistical likelihood for epidemic/pandemic outbreak increasing due to more widespread
public travel

www.grforum.org
29
Key Recommendations
Develop messages in multiple languages, in advance
Attempting to develop messages as a crisis is occurring adds an unnecessary additional step to the
response procedures.
Keep messages simple.
Consider the readability of messages and amount of processing required to understand the message.
Words matter.
Not only should differing levels of vocabulary, comprehension, and education levels be taken into account,
but also the differences of word meaning within a language dialect and situational context of the crisis.
Deliver messages in multiple languages.
Multilingual or alternative language messages should be considered for target audiences who are L2
speakers of the primary language, particularly for use during urgent peak warning messages.
Deliver messages using multiple modalities.
Ensure that multiple language messages are delivered using the same changes as messages in the locale’s
official (majority) language.

www.grforum.org
30
Need for Accountability, Metrics and Critique
Research and Discussion Needs:
• To positively effect survival rates during future disasters, ongoing collection and sharing of
research data is needed.
− Language data research, such as described in this presentation, is one area requiring
critical oversight and attention, especially as multilingual populations continue to shift
geographically
• Can data from existing government and public service agencies (such as, in the U.S., FEMA,
NIST, CDC, WHO, NOAA, NWS, and others), in concert with private industry’s capabilities,
perhaps ideally provide new avenues for research and development to better address
these issues as they evolve?
• As available digital messaging/alerting technology continues to rapidly advance,
− Can we support efforts to capture and properly utilize collected crisis communication
data?
− What are the implications, needs, problems to overcome?

Author Contact Information
Robert C. Chandler, Ph.D.
Professor and Director,
Nicholson School of Communication
University of Central Florida
P.O. Box 161344
Orlando, FL 32816-1344
USA
Phone: 001 (407) 823-2683
Fax: 001 (407) 823-0557
E-Mail: Robert.Chandler@ucf.edu
http://robertcchandler.wordpress.com/
Chandler has published more than 100 articles and papers and is the author or co-author of nine
books, including “Emergency Notification,” and “Surviving the Pandemic.”
He is also convener of the annual International Crisis & Risk Communication (ICRC) Conference,
held each year at the UCF campus in Florida. For details, please visit:
http://communication.cos.ucf.edu/icrc/

www.grforum.org
32
Added value
for the Post 2015 Framework
for Disaster Risk Reduction

www.grforum.org
33
Added value
for the Post 2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction
Main gaps, needs and further steps to be addressed in the Post 2015 Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction in
• Research:
• Stress experienced by crisis-impacted individuals causes key changes in physiological,
psychological and emotional response, negatively impacting their cognitive functioning
and behavioural compliance with emergency messaging during crisis.
• It is widely observed that cognitive impairment affects vocabulary comprehension
levels.
• It is also potentially changes language-specific functioning, as commonly reported
among crisis response professionals with regard to multilingual audiences during
disasters.
• Crisis often introduces hyper-stress, involving fear, anxiety, uncertainty, and
physiological stress caused by lack of sleep, worry, and hyper-vigilance.
• Such states can alter audiences’ ability to perceive situational dangers and to interpret
and comply with recommended action.
• It is essential that crisis messages be devised accordingly, and further detailed research
into this area is warranted.

www.grforum.org
34
Added value
Reduction in
• Research (cont’d):
− It is misguided to withhold immediate public notification of sudden crises due to fear
of widespread panic. Sending the correct message at the right times, to the correct
audiences and with the proper terminology is essential. Reducing vocabulary
sophistication and volume of words is one aspect. Yet, this objective is no simple
matter to achieve; it entails creating many separate, strategized messages, prepared
differently for the type of crisis, audience and phase of the crisis. Certain crisis stages
call for short, direct instruction. Others require more detailed messages.
− Much of the existing advice in this area is derived from knowledge gained by the
overlap of investigated cognitive science research findings in concert with what is
discussed among crisis communication professionals. However, additional empirical
research is needed. Opportunities may be emerging which should be recognized and
funded. As we gain increasing technological sophistication in digitally automated
emergency messaging, options to strategize messages increase. It is recommended to
further research simultaneously capturing data which may be useful in accurately
analysing effectiveness of messaging strategies.

www.grforum.org
35
Added value
Reduction in
• Education & Training:
More elaborate, sophisticated training is required as to several facets of emergency
communication during disaster, including lessons learned and best practices as they pertain
to various disaster contexts, phases and audiences. In addition to education regarding
issues of cognitive functioning during crisis, it is important to know which communication
channels are available and effective in various areas and which are changing. Within the
social media channel, for example, options vary depending on demographics. Moreover,
there should be training as to uses of channel redundancy during various phases of crisis.

www.grforum.org
36
Added value
Reduction in
• Implementation & Training:
Communication needs to be a featured focal area of crisis preparation – not merely a
peripheral sidelight. While logistics of crisis response are often complex, the importance of
a core understanding of foundations of effective communication cannot be understated.
The fact that radios are working does not necessarily mean there is successful
communication. Speaking the same language as the audience does not inherently mean
that anyone is “speaking the same language.”

www.grforum.org
37
Added value
Reduction in
• Policy Dialogue:
Involvement of social science communication research findings and expert researchers in
the development and stipulation of policies, regulations, requirements and minimum
standards of compliance/performance is essential to effective policy dialogue.

CHANDLER-The role of first language reversion in communication and outreach

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à CHANDLER-The role of first language reversion in communication and outreach

Similaire à CHANDLER-The role of first language reversion in communication and outreach (20)

Plus de Global Risk Forum GRFDavos

Plus de Global Risk Forum GRFDavos (20)

CHANDLER-The role of first language reversion in communication and outreach

Notes de l'éditeur