top of page

Closing the Communication Loop: thoughts about campus alerting

  • Writer: jeannettesutton
    jeannettesutton
  • Aug 29
  • 3 min read

Updated: Sep 3

When people have been told to protect themselves by taking shelter; when the conditions are highly uncertain; when the threat holds a type of dread that permeates one's psyche, alerting authorities of all types - those who use IPAWS, opt-in systems, or otherwise - must close the communication loop.


The communication loop begins when a warning is issued to prepare people and instruct them to take action to protect themselves. It is the beginning of a conversation where one person holds knowledge and information. It is an imbalance of power. Those who receive the message must choose to believe it and to act, and routinely take steps to confirm as they make decisions to act or quickly thereafter.


The communication loop continues when the person with knowledge chooses to continue to inform those who are taking protective action, or restricts information, purposefully or due to a lack of preparedness, or some other reason. Without information, we see intensified information seeking - often called rumoring - where people try to make sense of the event, the ongoing conditions, and what they should do. Absent authoritative information, gaps will be filled by speculation and "maybes"; not malicious, purely attempting to decipher the conditions around them.


When the communication loop is not closed, those people who stay locked in their safe rooms, checking their social media, silently waiting and scared, must decide on their own if they can come out of hiding or remain there longer.


We've seen this played out over and over again in school shooting incidents. The loop is opened, it remains open for many hours without additional updates, and in some cases it appears to never close.


This week, with the numerous swatting events that have occurred across the U.S., we've read about unclear initial messages that provided limited content and context. As many opt-in alerting systems go that lack geo-targeting capabilities, the absence of clear location information in a message means a campus-wide alert puts thousands on edge. The use of phrases like "run, hide, fight" is shorthand for "active shooter; protect yourself" but absent additional information, students and others on campus are at an extreme disadvantage to interpret how to act and where to do so. Furthermore, a lack of planning and policy means the loop remains open for many, far too long.


Recent research on post-alert messages has shown that people need closure after receiving an alert that required them to take action. In an experimental study, we tested the effects of receiving no message, receiving a message-focused message that "ends" the initial alert (such as with the words "lifted" or "cancelled"), and receiving a message that clearly states the threat has ended and people can return/resume/conclude actions. The worst approach, by far, is to leave the loop open by not issuing a message. In contrast, those who received a message-focused message and a message the explains that the threat has ended performed far better at increasing people's understanding, deciding, and self-efficacy. By far, people preferred the third type - to learn that threat has ended, allowing them to make an interpretation that the danger is over.


What we have seen in the communication response across university campuses this week is a reminder that when the communication loop is opened, it must be closed.


These kinds of dire and frightening events require preparation to communicate effectively. This includes establishing policies about channels to communicate emergency messages; 1) pre-scripting templates that can be used when time is limited; 2) pre-approving messages to limit messaging delays; 3) creating a dark website for posting updates - even if information is limited; and 4) determining ahead of time how to inform people that they are no longer at risk.


One more thing that we have learned in our research on post-alert messaging; when risk communicators have these plans, policies, and templates prepared ahead of time and used in a timely manner, they boost their credibility by demonstrating that they know how to communicate effectively and that they have managed the threat. They also appear transparent in their communication and show care and concern for their population.


I sent my own child off to college this week. I expect nothing less from his campus, demonstrating that they are prepared to care for him and his peers when minutes matter.


For more recommended contents, be sure to download The Warning Lexicon - it's free and offers step-by-step instructions on how to write a better warning message.

________________________________________________________________________


Feel free to post this on your social media site, just remember to attribute it to The Warn Room and include the web address: TheWarnRoom.com - Thank you!


You may click on the keywords below to find other entries with similar topics.

bottom of page