Home Team Behavioural Sciences Cenre

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334808330

Validating the SIR3 Model on crisis communication by Political Ofﬁce Holders

Presentation · July 2019 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34309.09440

CITATIONS READS 0 92

3 authors, including:

Xingyu Chen Loo Seng Neo Ministry of Home Affairs, Singapore Nanyang Technological University

16 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS 54 PUBLICATIONS 101 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

CRIME-FAKE NEWS NEXUS: AN EMERGING CAUSE OF CONCERN View project

terrorism View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Loo Seng Neo on 31 July 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. HOME TEAM BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES CENTRE

24 JUL 2019 Clement Lau Yong Hao Behavioural Sciences Research Intern Resilience and Safety Psychology Branch

Supervisor: Ken Chen

1 • Crisis communication is to provide information concerning the nature, significance of the crisis. – Uncertainty arises out of a crisis (Seeger et al, 2003)

• Public seeks information as a means to reduce negative emotions – Help facilitate remedial actions (Witte, 1994)

• Individuals can learn about – Potential future risks – Reducing the harm, threat, and severity of a future crisis (Sandman, Miller, Johnson, & Weinstein, 1993)

© HOME TEAM BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES CENTRE 2 © HOME TEAM BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES CENTRE 3 – Show Deterrence – Reassure the People – Highlight Safety as priority – Normalize events – Show of force – Reduce perceived marginalization – Show of control – Undermine efforts of terrorists – Rally the People – Inform the People – Build social harmony ▪ Reduce misinformation – Show solidarity amongst different groups – Speak with consistency – Provide timely updates – – Use positive language Resilience – Showcase examples of resilience ▪ Prevent stereotyping – Encourage the public to stay strong and – Challenge misconceptions unified

1 Tan, J., Goh, P., Chen, X., Neo., L.S., Ong, G., & Khader, M. (2017). Crisis Communications in the Day after Terror: The SIR3 Model (HTBSC Research Report 17/2017). Singapore: Home Team Behavioural Sciences Centre. 2 Research have shown that SIR3 is theoretically validated © HOME TEAM BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES CENTRE 4 • Which principles of SIR3 model frequently appear in POHs’ crisis communication?

• Are there differences in public reactions to POHs who apply the principles of SIR3 model in their crisis communications?

▪Global Terrorism Database –2013-2017 –Australasia & Oceania, Eastern Europe, North America, South America, Western Europe

▪Open sources of information –Manual search (e.g. Google News) –2018-2019

▪Yielded 28 cases

© HOME TEAM BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES CENTRE 6 ▪ 2013 Boston Marathon Bombing ▪ 2017 Charlottesville / Unite the Right rally ▪ 2014 Grozny clashes ▪ 2017 London Bridge attack ▪ 2014 Sydney hostage crisis ▪ 2017 Manchester Arena bombing ▪ 2015 Charlie Hebdo shooting ▪ 2017 New York City truck attack ▪ 2015 November Paris attacks ▪ 2017 Parsons Green train bombing ▪ 2015 Parramatta shooting ▪ 2017 Portland train attack ▪ 2015 San Bernardino attack ▪ 2017 Stockholm truck attack ▪ 2016 Berlin attack ▪ 2017 Turku attack ▪ 2016 Brussels bombings ▪ 2017 Westminster attack ▪ 2016 New York and New Jersey bombings ▪ 2018 Carcassonne and Trèbes attack ▪ 2016 Nice truck attack ▪ 2018 Melbourne stabbing attack ▪ 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting ▪ 2018 Paris knife attack ▪ 2017 Barcelona attacks ▪ 2018 Pittsburgh synagogue shooting ▪ 2017 Brighton siege ▪ 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings

© HOME TEAM BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES CENTRE 7 – Step 2 — Identifying relevant POHs who – Step 4 — Coding responded to the attack ▪ Code Book ▪ POHs have the greatest influence to bring – 3-Level Index (Abbott and Monsen, 1979; Patten and the community back to normalcy. Crampton, 2004; Wiseman, 1982) » Presence = 1 » Absence = 0 – Step 3 — Data collection » Antagonizing = -1 ▪ Manual Google Search (Google News) ▪ 66 articles were coded ▪ Search terms – [Name of Attack] + [POH] + [Praise OR Criticism] ▪ Inclusion criteria – Must involved speeches/ statements as responses to the relevant terror attack – Published between date of attack, to 6 months later ▪ Exclusion criteria – Does not provide any significant information regarding POH’s crisis communication ▪ Yielded 747 URLs

80% 73% 74% 70% 66% 63% 64% 60%

50%

40% 34% 37% 36% 30% 27% 26%

20%

10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Show Inform the Reassure Rally the Deterrence People the People People Resilience Praise 27% 26% 34% 37% 36% Criticism 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Neither 73% 74% 66% 63% 64%

80% 73% 74% 70% 66% 63% 64% 60%

50%

40% 37% 34% 36% 30% 27% 26%

20%

10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Show Inform the Reassure Rally the Deterrence People the People People Resilience Praise 27% 26% 34% 37% 36% Criticism 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Neither 73% 74% 66% 63% 64%

Challenge misconceptions, 54% 50%

Encourage public to stay strong and united, 40% 38%

Show solidarity, 34%

30% Praises Normalize events, 29%

20%

10%

0% Absent Present

120% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Show Inform the Reassure Rally the Resilience Deterrence People the People People Praise 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Criticism 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% Neither 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

© HOME TEAM BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES CENTRE 13 • When POHs threaten the collective community identity – When POHs convey messages that do not signify unity within the nation, and community, they get criticized. – Many proclaimed their disapproval towards Fraser Anning, which triggered a petition for expulsion from his position as the senator (Newsx Bureau, 2019)

© HOME TEAM BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES CENTRE 14 • People who are conducting crisis communications should emphasize on – Challenging misconceptions – Normalize events – Show solidarity – Encourage the public to stay strong and unified

• They also should not – Increase perceived marginalization (against a particular group) – Disrupt social harmony – Threatens solidarity (to increase political support from certain groups)

© HOME TEAM BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES CENTRE 15 ––ShowShow Deterrence ––ReassureReassure thethe PeoplePeople – Demonstrate a response to – Remind Singaporeans that we have faced overcome the crisis (i.e. increase threats in the past, and the nation will security presence) overcome it again (with examples such as – Send warnings to perpetrators SQ117 hijack, McDonald House bombing..) – Show of control for the situation at – Showcase Singaporeans from various race hand and religion working together in post attack period

– Inform the People – Communicating facts of crisis – Rally the People – Through television, and social media – Call on multi-cultural, multi-ethnic stance (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) – Highlight examples of solidarity within and – Dismiss rumours/ misinformation between race/ religions whenever possible – Constant engagement, relationship- ––Resilience building, and communication of Resilience relevant (security & safety) – Discuss about the key lessons learnt information – Features examples of resilience/ return to normalcy

Clement Lau Yong Hao Behavioural Sciences Research Intern [email protected]

Chen Xingyu Behavioural Sciences Research Analyst [email protected]