Psychosocial Impacts of Disaster Discussion Phase I: Answer The below questions: Listen to “The Daily” podcast episode (Putting ‘Fake News’ on Trial) May

Psychosocial Impacts of Disaster Discussion Phase I: Answer The below questions:

Listen to “The Daily” podcast episode (Putting ‘Fake News’ on Trial) May 24,2018: https://tinyurl.com/yb5o7uyl (23 min) .

Next, read these two articles, which can be found in the attachments.

Psychological Outcomes in Reaction to Media Exposure to Disasters and Large-Scale Violence: A Meta-Analysis
Social Media in Disaster Risk Reduction and Crisis Management

Social Media and the Internet undoubtedly give us helpful tools for crisis response and management. That said, there are negatives that can sometimes outweigh the positives.

1. Discuss the ways that the changing media landscape is affecting the psychosocial consequences of disaster, for better or for worse.

2. Reflect on the ways that media (social or otherwise) positively and negatively impact crisis management. How can we quell the rumor mill? How do we combat further traumatization?

Reference to appropriate authoritative resources and official websites. Must be accessible online. Use New Times Roman 12 font with 1” margins and APA style. The answer should be at least 500 words.

You will find 2 examples from the other students are attached, but do an original work.

Phase II:

I need to provide a substantive response to my co-students and support my idea. In the attachments, you will find 2 classmates that I want a separate file for each one.

Reference to appropriate authoritative resources and official websites. Must be accessible online. Use New Times Roman 12 font with 1” margins and APA style. 1. Discuss the ways that the changing media landscape is affecting the psychosocial
consequences of disaster, for better or for worse.
The podcast hit a nerve, admittedly. It was disturbing that the media in the case of Sandy
Hook allowed outsiders into the private grief that the families of the deceased were experiencing.
That case is a study in how the media can negatively influence the psychosocial effects of a
disaster. While the media may keep the public better informed and in tune to the country’s
shifting political sphere, it also may create some feelings of cognitive dissonance in the survivors
or those who were adjacently affected if the narrative that the media is telling is at odds with
their experience. They could also be prohibited from processing the experience in their preferred
manner by inquisitive parties, or triggered by events similar to those that have happened locally
(Hopwood, & Schutte, 2017). This interruption of normal and established coping mechanisms
can prevent it from happening in a healthy manner, resulting in adverse reactions like the family
from the podcast who’s children slept with their lights on (Barbaro, 2018). In the aftermath of the
disaster, social media can be a polarizing force, as explained by the additional articles for this
week’s readings. My personal view on weapons is that their use greatly depends on the wielder
(eg. guns don’t kill people, people kill people). However, they do make it a lot easier for an
individual to hurt another. The same concept, in my mind, applies to the use of social media. It
hastens the dissemination of information and opinion, whether it be true or fictitious, and can
cause a much larger impact than simple word of mouth, coined the “listening function”
(Alexander, 2014). The conclusions of the other study seemed to settle on the negative aspects of
the media in disaster. From the data, I’m inclined to agree with their conclusions, however, I
think that it neglects a discussion of the good information that is dispersed during an event.
2. Reflect on the ways that media (social or otherwise) positively and negatively impact crisis
management. How can we quell the rumor mill? How do we combat further traumatization?
The best way to get ahead of the rumor mill is to set the narrative, instead of letting the
media tell their own version of the story. That’s why having a good PIO is essential to quell
rumors. In DMM 610 and my ICS 300 course, we learned that giving the media a specific person
to contact, giving them regular updates, and providing them a space to congregate will help
ensure that information is accurate and that the media do not potentially put themselves in danger
to “grab a story”. Additionally, the dangers of misinformation cannot be understated. It can lead
to bystanders getting injured or interfering with things they are not equipped to handle. While I
don’t think that the media will ever refrain from reporting on the latest tragedy, I think that we
can do a better job of preparing people for the media onslaught that will follow. Encouraging
media outlets to place disclaimers before potentially upsetting news stories can mitigate the
effects of the broadcasts. Additionally, placing parental locks on TVs so that children cannot
view harmful imagery may be beneficial. These methods might prevent the consumption of
negative media, but will not be completely effective. Individuals must bear some of the onus as
well, and prepare their own coping mechanisms to combat adverse reactions in the future.
Alexander, D. E. (2014). Social Media in Disaster Risk Reduction and Crisis
Management. Science and Engineering Ethics,20, 717-733. doi:10.1007/s11948-013-9502-z
Barbaro, M. (2018, May 24). Listen to ‘The Daily’: Putting ‘Fake News’ on Trial.
Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/24/podcasts/the-daily/sandy-hook-alex-jones-
infowars-lawsuit.html?rref=collection/column/thedaily&action=click&contentCollection=podcasts®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=la
test&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=collection
Hopwood, T. L., & Schutte, N. S. (2017). Psychological outcomes in reaction to media
exposure to disasters and large-scale violence: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Violence,7(2),
316-327. doi:10.1037/vio0000056
Psychology of Violence
2017, Vol. 7, No. 2, 316 –327
© 2016 American Psychological Association
2152-0828/17/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/vio0000056
Psychological Outcomes in Reaction to Media Exposure to Disasters and
Large-Scale Violence: A Meta-Analysis
Tanya L. Hopwood and Nicola S. Schutte
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
University of New England
Objective: A quantitative meta-analysis set out to consolidate the effect of experimental studies of media
exposure to disasters and large-scale violence on negative psychological outcomes. Method: The
meta-analysis included 18 experimental studies with an overall sample size of 1,634 to obtain an overall
effect size and information regarding moderators of the effect size. Results: An overall significant and
large effect size of Hedges’ g of 1.61 showed that, across studies, media exposure to disasters and
large-scale violence was followed by negative psychological outcomes. Outcome type was a significant
moderator, with anxiety reactions showing an especially strong effect. Community sensitization was a
significant moderator, with studies conducted in a region that had recently been exposed to the type of
disaster or violence portrayed in the media showing especially large effect sizes. Conclusion: The results
indicate that media exposure to disasters and large-scale violence can cause negative psychological
outcomes, at least transiently. Limitations included a lack of statistical power in some moderator analyses
and the inability to draw inferences about the duration of effects. There is a need for further research
aimed at identifying the possible cumulative effects of media exposure and identification of groups at
greatest risk for harmful outcomes.
Keywords: media exposure, disaster, violence, meta-analysis
antecedent of posttraumatic symptoms (Houston, 2009; Pfefferbaum et al., 2014), and Murray (2008) claimed that the extant
research has supported three types of effects of televised violence—increased aggression, desensitization, and fear. Further,
Wilson (2008) concluded that children’s extensive use of screen
media (including violent material) may affect their socialization,
though these effects may be mediated by factors such as age,
gender, the extent to which they identify with the characters
depicted, and how real they believe the media content to be.
Although some studies have found either no effect or beneficial
effects of disaster-related media exposure (Linley, Joseph, Cooper,
Harris, & Meyer, 2003; Williams & Khan, 2011), and other
researchers have asserted that media exposure may only exacerbate preexisting symptoms of trauma (Ahern et al., 2002), the
majority of studies suggest that media consumption of disaster and
large-scale violence-related material may evoke psychological reactions similar to those experienced by direct victims of trauma
(Houston, 2009; Pfefferbaum et al., 2014; Slone & Shoshani,
2010). Longitudinal and survey studies found that people distally
located from the September 11 terrorist attacks of 2001 and exposed to the events primarily via mass media experienced significant personal threat and posttraumatic stress reactions (Callahan,
Hilsenroth, Yonai, & Waehler, 2005; Dougall, Hayward, & Baum,
2005; Schuster et al., 2001; Silver, Holman, McIntosh, Poulin, &
Gil-Rivas, 2002). Some studies found a positive association between hours of September 11 TV coverage consumed and stress
reactions (Blanchard et al., 2004; Schlenger et al., 2002), and other
researchers identified a link between disaster-focused distress and
perceived similarity to the victims as depicted by media (Wayment, 2004).
Although substantial research has been conducted in the area of
media exposure to disasters and large-scale violence, most of this
Advances in technology are affording people unprecedented
second-hand exposure to disasters and large-scale violence (Kaplan, 2008; Slone & Shoshani, 2010). Given the vast number of
people consuming modern media and the growing propensity
of news outlets to employ techniques such as rolling coverage of
disasters and large-scale violence as they occur (Jain, 2010; Kaplan, 2008), it is increasingly important for research to explore the
potential impact of threat-related content. The purpose of the
present study was to consolidate the effect of experimental studies
of media exposure to disasters and large-scale violence on negative
psychological outcomes.
There has been a long-standing academic debate as to whether
or not media with violent content can constitute exposure to
violence. Some scholars claim that much of the research linking
violent media to aggressive behaviors has drawn unfounded inferences of causation from largely correlational research (Grimes &
Bergen, 2008). In addition, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM–5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013) has amended the previous version (4th ed., text.
rev.; DSM–IV–TR; American Psychiatric Association, 2000) to
explicitly state that media consumption cannot constitute exposure
to trauma for a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Bolstering the other side of the debate, numerous studies have
found evidence to suggest that media exposure may act as an
This article was published Online First May 5, 2016.
Tanya L. Hopwood and Nicola S. Schutte, School of Behavioural,
Cognitive, and Social Sciences, University of New England.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Nicola S.
Schutte, Psychology, University of New England, Psychology Lane, Armidale, Australia. E-mail: nschutte@une.edu.au
316
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
MEDIA EXPOSURE TO LARGE-SCALE VIOLENCE
research has employed self-report survey methods. These studies
provide valuable details and are rich in ecological validity, collecting information on how individuals have chosen to consume
media and retrospectively recording subjective reactions. Researchers have examined media forms such as TV, newspaper,
radio, and the Internet, and have looked at coverage of both
terrorist events and natural disasters. Many such studies have
found strong links between disaster-related media consumption
and negative psychological outcomes, including increased anxiety
(Schuster et al., 2001), fear and depression (Lachlan, Spence, &
Seeger, 2009), a heightened sense of threat (Maeseele, Verleye,
Stevens, & Speckhard, 2008), aggression (Argyrides & Downey,
2004), and posttraumatic stress symptomology (Pfefferbaum, Pfefferbaum, North, & Neas, 2002; Pfefferbaum et al., 2000; Schlenger
et al., 2002).
A recent descriptive research synthesis by Pfefferbaum et al.
(2014), which examined correlational studies of the relationship
between disaster-related media consumption and psychological
outcomes, found evidence of an association between TV viewing
of disaster news and negative outcomes such as posttraumatic
stress (PTS) symptoms, stress reactions, depression, and fear.
Similarly, a meta-analysis by Houston (2009) found a significant
overall effect size (r ⫽ .162) for the relationship between
terrorism-related media consumption and PTS. However, as with
the individual studies, the correlational nature of the data comprising these meta-analyses does not allow for inferences regarding
causality; people who watch traumatic events on the news may
consequently experience fear. Alternatively, people experiencing
fear may watch traumatic news, perhaps for information-seeking,
surveillance purposes, or reassurance.
Longitudinal studies that measured psychological dimensions
pre- and postdisasters (Cohen et al., 2006; Kennedy, Charlesworth,
& Chen, 2004; Otto et al., 2007; van Zelst, de Beurs, & Smit,
2003) have helped support the theory of media exposure to disasters and large-scale violence effecting negative psychological outcomes. These studies, although again high in ecological validity,
cannot control for a range of potentially confounding exposure
variables, and so are unable to isolate the effects of media.
Although many researchers have used experimental methods to
explore individual psychological reactions to media exposure to
disasters and large-scale threats, no meta-analysis of these studies
exists. By conducting a meta-analysis of experimental studies of
media exposure to disasters or large-scale violence, we aimed to
identify an overall effect size for psychological outcomes and also
consolidate information regarding the main types of reactions to
such media exposure. A review of the literature indicated that
anxiety (or stress) and anger are commonly measured outcomes
(Lerner, Gonzalez, Small, & Fischhoff, 2003; Pfefferbaum et al.,
2014). As pointed out by Slone and Shoshani (2010), the experience of these emotions is predicted by the theory of protection
motivation (Rogers, 1983). This theory asserts that when a person
interprets a situation as threatening, anxiety will often result. This
anxiety may promote a need to defend the self and others, which
may in turn lead to anger. We believe that this theory may help
provide a useful scaffold for understanding how media exposure to
disasters and large-scale violence may communicate a sense of
personal or community threat, which may in turn provoke reactions such as anxiety, anger, and other forms of negative affect.
317
Another theory that may add to the conceptual framework for
understanding people’s reactions to this type of media content is
the conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll & Lilly, 1993). The
conservation of resources theory claims that a person’s ability to
cope with challenges depends on his or her perceived inventory of
practical, social, and emotional resources. Maguen, Papa, and Litz
(2008) posited that large-scale threats (such as terrorism) intensify
perceptions of resource loss in areas such as self-esteem, selfefficacy, and internal locus of control. The loss of these safeguarding resources may increase levels of negative affect and
diminish adaptive coping (Moos & Holahan, 2003). Brewin, Andrews, and Valentine (2000) showed that many studies have supported a cascading effect of perceived resource loss, with multiple
stressors leading to increased vulnerability to further stress. If it
can be demonstrated that one-time media exposure to disasters or
large-scale violence plays a causal role in negative psychological
outcomes— even transiently—this may suggest the presence of
maladaptive and more enduring effects in some individuals as the
result of cumulative long-term exposure.
In the current meta-analysis, we predicted that across studies,
there would be a significant effect size for the impact of media
exposure to disasters or large-scale violence on negative psychological outcomes. There are a number of variables that we believed
might moderate outcomes across studies: intentionality of the
event portrayed, media format, whether the study was conducted
before or after September 11, community sensitization to trauma in
relation to the sample, and differences in participant sample gender
and age. The background for selection of these moderator variables
follows.
Intentionality of Event
Research has indicated that a disaster designed with human
intent (e.g., a terrorist attack) may be associated with a higher risk
of subsequent psychopathology than a disaster of accidental or
natural origin (DiMaggio & Galea, 2006). In addition, research
results have suggested that different forms of emotions may be
more common in the wake of accidental versus intentional trauma
(e.g., anger for intentional events, fear for random events; Rosoff,
John, & Prager, 2012). We examined whether portrayals of intentionally created disasters would result in stronger negative psychological outcomes.
Media Format
Communications research has provided evidence for the efficacy of video footage, compared with more traditional forms of
media such as newsprint or radio, in creating a more emotionally
arousing experience—a sense of realism that has been referred to
as presence (Lombard & Ditton, 1997). Graphic footage of disasters may evoke a sense of immediacy and engagement, and perhaps even a potent communication of threat (Callahan et al., 2005;
Cho et al., 2003). Meta-analytic studies and research syntheses of
correlational research (Houston, 2009; Pfefferbaum et al., 2014)
indicated that consumption of disaster or large-scale threat news
via TV is significantly associated with numerous negative psychological outcomes, including PTSD, PTS, depression, anxiety, and
anger. We examined whether video portrayal of disasters would be
associated with larger effect sizes.
HOPWOOD AND SCHUTTE
318
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
The Impact of September 11
Much research on media consumption of disasters and largescale violence occurred in the wake of the terrorist attacks in the
United States on September 11, 2001 (Neria & Sullivan, 2011).
The rolling coverage of these events in the media continued for
days, and then sporadically during the weeks and months that
followed, giving millions of people across the globe access to
details of the disaster (Pfefferbaum et al., 2002). The extensive
coverage and large scale of the mass casualties that occurred may
have evoked changes in belief systems related to safety and security for many individuals (Linley et al., 2003). We examined
whether post-September 11 studies would show stronger effect
sizes.
Community Sensitization to Trauma
Although some theorists contend that previous exposure to
trauma may serve as a form of inoculation against adversity
(Eysenck, 1983, as cited in Shrira, Palgi, Hamama-Raz, Goodwin,
& Ben-Ezra, 2014), many studies have indicated that a history of
previous trauma increases susceptibility to adverse psychological
outcomes, such as PTSD (Brewin et al., 2000; Chatard et al., 2012;
Shrira et al., 2014). Some global locations have had more recent
direct experience of disasters (e.g., war, terrorism, disease, and
natural disasters) than others. In the current meta-analysis, the
global region in which each experiment was conducted was coded
as a possible moderator variable. Also, an additional variable
called community sensitization was created to identify whether or
not the region in question had recently (within the previous 5
years) experienced a disaster of the type portrayed in the stimulus
material. We examined whether studies conducted in areas that
have recently experienced large-scale disaster or violence would
show larger effect sizes.
contended that children may be a particularly vulnerable population in terms of adverse PTS reactions (Comer & Kendall, 2007;
Dirkzwager, Kerssens, & Yzermans, 2006; Pfefferbaum, 1997;
Saylor, Cowart, Lipovsky, Jackson, & Finch, 2003). We examined
whether studies of adults with older participants would show
stronger effect sizes and whether studies with child participants
would show stronger effect sizes.
Current Study
The current study aimed to consolidate findings of experimental
research providing information regarding the causal impact of
disaster-related media exposure on psycholog…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment