Natural Hazards

, Volume 64, Issue 1, pp 107–137 | Cite as

A model of household preparedness for earthquakes: how individuals make meaning of earthquake information and how this influences preparedness

  • Julia S. Becker
  • Douglas Paton
  • David M. Johnston
  • Kevin R. Ronan
Original Paper


One way to reduce the risk from earthquakes is for individuals to undertake preparations for earthquakes at home. Common preparation measures include gathering together survival items, undertaking mitigation actions, developing a household emergency plan, gaining survival skills or participating in wider social preparedness actions. While current earthquake education programmes advocate that people undertake a variety of these activities, actual household preparedness remains at modest levels. Effective earthquake education is inhibited by an incomplete understanding of how the preparedness process works. Previous research has focused on understanding the influence individual cognitive processes have on the earthquake preparedness process but has been limited in identifying other influences posed by the wider social contextual environment. This project used a symbolic interactionism perspective to explore the earthquake preparedness process through a series of qualitative interviews with householders in three New Zealand urban locations. It investigated earthquake information that individuals are exposed to, how people make meaning of this information and how this relates to undertaking actual preparedness measures. During the study, the relative influence of cognitive, emotive and societal factors on the preparedness process was explored and the interactions between these identified. A model of the preparedness process based on the interviews was developed and is presented in this paper.


Earthquakes Preparedness Adjustment adoption Earthquake information New Zealand 



The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of the Foundation for Research Science and Technology, New Zealand (now the Ministry of Science and Innovation), GNS Science, Canterbury Civil Defence Emergency Management Group and Hawke’s Bay Civil Defence Emergency Management Group. We would also like to thank local emergency management officers who assisted with setting up the research, and household residents from Napier, Wanganui and Timaru who volunteered to take part in the study as interviewees.


  1. Ajzen I (1985) From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behaviour. In: Kuhl J, Beckmann J (eds) Action control: from cognition to behaviour. Springer, Berlin, pp 11–40Google Scholar
  2. Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura A (2001) Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Mediapsychology 3:265–299Google Scholar
  4. Becker JS, Johnston DM, Paton D, Ronan KR (submitted-a) How people use earthquake information and its influence on household preparedness in New Zealand. J Civil Eng ArchitGoogle Scholar
  5. Becker JS, Paton D, Johnston DM, Ronan KR (submitted-b) Salient beliefs about earthquake hazards and household preparedness. Risk AnalGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker JS, Paton D, Johnston DM, Ronan KR (submitted-c) Societal factors of earthquake information meaning-making and preparedness. Int J Mass Emerg DisastersGoogle Scholar
  7. Benight CC, Bandura A (2004) Social cognitive theory of posttraumatic recovery: the role of perceived self-efficacy. Behav Res Ther 42(10):1129–1148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blessman J, Skupski J, Jamil M, Jamil H, Bassett D, Wabeke R, Arnetz B (2007) Barriers to at-home-preparedness in public health employees: implications for disaster preparedness training. J Occup Environ Med 49(3):318–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blumer H (1969) Symbolic interactionism: perspective and method. University of California Press, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  10. Breinbauer C, Maddaleno M, Maddaleno H (2005) Youth: choices and change, promoting healthy behaviours in adolescents. Pan American Health Organisation, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  11. Burger JM, Palmer ML (1992) Changes in and generalization of unrealistic optimism following experiences with stressful events: reactions to the 1989 California Earthquake. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 18(1):39–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carter-Pokras O, Zambrana RE, Mora SE, Aaby KA (2007) Emergency preparedness: knowledge and perceptions of Latin American immigrants. J Health Care Poor Underserved 18(2):465–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Corbin J, Strauss A (2008) Basics of qualitative research, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  14. Cowan J, McClure J, Wilson M (2002) What a difference a year makes: how immediate and anniversary media reports influence judgements about earthquakes. Asian J Soc Psychol 5:169–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis MS (1989) Living along the fault line: an update on earthquake awareness and preparedness in Southern California. Urban Resour 5(4):8–14Google Scholar
  16. Dooley D, Catalano R, Mishra S, Serxner S (1992) Earthquake preparedness - predictors in a community survey. J Appl Soc Psychol 22(6):451–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dutton A, Carroll M (2001) Eyewitness testimony: effects of source of arousal on memory, source monitoring, and metamemory judgements. Aust J Psychol 53(2):83–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Duval TS, Mulilis J-P (1999) A person-relative-to-event (PrE) approach to negative threat appeals and earthquake preparedness: a field study. J Appl Soc Psychol 29(3):495–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Earthquake Commission (2011) Monitoring the effectiveness of the Earthquake Commission’s communication programme: quarter 2 2011. Earthquake Commission, WellingtonGoogle Scholar
  20. Farley JE (1998) Earthquake fears, predictions, and preparations in Mid-America. Southern Illinois University Press, CarbondaleGoogle Scholar
  21. Farley JE, Barlow HD, Finkelstein MS, Riley L (1993) Earthquake hysteria, before and after: a survey and follow-up on public response to the browning forecast. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 11(3):305–321Google Scholar
  22. Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  23. Flick U (2006) An introduction to qualitative research, 3rd edn. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Franks DD (2003) Emotions. In: Reynolds LT, Herman-Kinney NJ (eds) Handbook of symbolic interactionism. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, pp 787–809Google Scholar
  25. Garcia EM (1989) Earthquake preparedness in California: a survey of Irvine residents. Urban Resources 5(4):15–19Google Scholar
  26. Gasparini P, Manfredi G, Zschau J (2011) Earthquake early warning as a tool for improving society’s resilience and crisis response. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31(2):267–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Glaser BG, Strauss AL (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine de Gruyter, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Hanoch Y, Vitouch O (2004) When less is more. Information, emotional arousal and the ecological reframing of the Yerkes–Dodson Law. Theory Psychol 14(4):427–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Heller K, Alexander DB, Gatz M, Knight BG, Rose T (2005) Social and personal factors as predictors of earthquake preparation: the role of support provision, network discussion, negative affect, age, and education. J Appl Soc Psychol 35(2):399–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Helweg-Larsen M (1999) (The lack of) optimistic biases in response to the 1994 Northridge Earthquake: the role of personal experience. Basic Appl Soc Psychol 21(2):119–129Google Scholar
  31. Hendrikx J (2007) The June 2006 Canterbury snowstorm. J Hydrol NZ 46(1):33–49Google Scholar
  32. Herman-Kinney NJ, Verschaeve JM (2003) Methods of symbolic interactionism. In: Reynolds LT, Herman-Kinney NJ (eds) Handbook of symbolic interactionism. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, pp 213–252Google Scholar
  33. Hurnen F, McClure J (1997) The effect of increased earthquake knowledge on perceived preventability of earthquake damage. Australas J Disaster Trauma Stud 3:11Google Scholar
  34. Jackson EL (1977) Public response to earthquake hazard. Calif Geol 30:278–280Google Scholar
  35. Jackson EL (1981) Response to earthquake hazard—the west coast of North America. Environ Behav 13(4):387–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Johnston D, Bebbington MS, Lai C-D, Houghton BF, Paton D (1999) Volcanic hazards perceptions: comparative shifts in knowledge and risk. Disaster Prev Manag 8(2):118–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kerr J, Nathan S, Van Dissen R, Webb P, Brunsdon D, King A (2004) Planning for development of land on or close to active faults: a guideline to assist resource management planners in New Zealand. Ministry for the Environment, WellingtonGoogle Scholar
  38. Kirschenbaum A (2002) Disaster preparedness: a conceptual and empirical reevaluation. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 20(1):5–28Google Scholar
  39. Kirschenbaum A (2004) Generic sources of disaster communities: a social network approach. Int J Sociol Soc Policy 24(10–11):94–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kunreuther H (1992) Earthquake insurance as a hazard reduction strategy: the case of the homeowner. Paper prepared for a USGS monograph on the socio-economic impacts of earthquakes. Centre for Risk Management and Decision Processes, University of Pennsylvania, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  41. Kunreuther H, Ginsberg R, Miller L, Sagi P, Slovic P, Borkan B, Katz N (1978) Disaster insurance protection: public policy lessons. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Lindell MK, Perry RW (1992) Behavioural foundations of community emergency planning. Hemisphere Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  43. Lindell MK, Perry RW (2000) Household adjustment to earthquake hazard: a review of research. Environ Behav 32(4):461–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lindell MK, Perry RW (2011) The protective action decision model: theoretical modifications and additional evidence. Risk Anal. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01647.x Google Scholar
  45. Lindell MK, Prater CS (2000) Household adoption of seismic hazard adjustments: a comparison of residents in two states. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 18(2):317–338Google Scholar
  46. Lindell MK, Prater CS (2002) Risk area residents’ perceptions and adoption of seismic hazard adjustments. J Appl Soc Psychol 32(11):2377–2392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lindell MK, Whitney DJ (2000) Correlates of household seismic hazard adjustment adoption. Risk Anal 20(1):13–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lindell MK, Arlikatti S, Prater CS (2009) Why people do what they do to protect against earthquake risk: perceptions of hazard adjustment attributes. Risk Anal 29(8):1072–1088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McClure J (1998) Psychology of perception of risk. NZ Sci Rev 55(1–2):20–24Google Scholar
  50. McClure J, Walkey F, Allen M (1999) When earthquake damage is seen as preventable: attributions, locus of control and attitudes to risk. Appl Psychol 48(2):239–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. McClure J, Allen MW, Walkey F (2001) Countering fatalism: causal information in news reports affects judgments about earthquake damage. Basic Appl Soc Psychol 23(2):109–121Google Scholar
  52. McClure J, Sutton RM, Sibley CG (2007a) Listening to reporters or engineers? How instance-based messages about building design affect earthquake fatalism. J Appl Soc Psychol 37(9):1956–1973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. McClure J, Sutton RM, Wilson M (2007b) How information about building design influences causal attributions for earthquake damage. Asian J Soc Psychol 10(4):233–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. McIvor D, Paton D (2007) Preparing for natural hazards: normative and attitudinal influences. Disaster Prev Manag 16(1):79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mclvor D, Paton D, Johnston D (2009) Modelling community preparation for natural hazards: understanding hazard cognitions. J Pac Rim Psychol 3(2):39–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mileti DS (1999) Disasters by design: a reassessment of natural hazards in the United States. Joseph Henry Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  57. Mileti DS, Darlington JD (1995) Societal response to revised earthquake probabilities in the San Francisco Bay area. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 13(2):119–145Google Scholar
  58. Mileti DS, Darlington JD (1997) The role of searching in shaping reactions to earthquake risk information. Soc Probl 44(1):89–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mileti DS, Fitzpatrick C (1992) The causal sequence of risk communication in the Parkfield Earthquake prediction experiment. Risk Anal 12(3):393–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mileti DS, Fitzpatrick C (1993) The great earthquake experiment: risk communication and public action. Westview Press, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  61. Mileti DS, O’Brien PW (1992) Warnings during disaster: normalizing communicated risk. Soc Probl 39(1):40–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Mulilis J-P (1996) Social considerations of disaster-resistant technology: the person-relative-to-event (PrE) model of coping with threat. J Urban Technol 3(3):59–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mulilis J-P, Duval TS (1995) Negative threat appeals and earthquake preparedness: a person-relative-to-event (PrE) model of coping with threat. J Appl Soc Psychol 25(15):1319–1339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Mulilis J-P, Duval TS (1997) The PrE model of coping and tornado preparedness: moderating effects of responsibility. J Appl Soc Psychol 27(19):1750–1765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Mulilis J-P, Duval TS (2003) Activating effects of resources relative to threat and responsibility in person-relative-to-event theory of coping with threat: an educational application. J Appl Soc Psychol 33(7):1437–1456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Mulilis J-P, Lippa R (1990) Behavioral change in earthquake preparedness due to negative threat appeals: a test of protection motivation theory. J Appl Soc Psychol 20(8, Pt 1):619–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Mulilis J-P, Duval TS, Lippa R (1990) The effects of a large destructive local earthquake on earthquake preparedness as assessed by an earthquake preparedness scale. Nat Hazards 3(4):357–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Mulilis J-P, Duval TS, Bovalino K (2000) Tornado preparedness of students, nonstudent renters, and nonstudent owners: issues of PrE theory. J Appl Soc Psychol 30(6):1310–1329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Mulilis J-P, Duval TS, Rogers R (2003) The effect of a swarm of local tornados on tornado preparedness: a quasi-comparable cohort investigation. J Appl Soc Psychol 33(8):1716–1725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. New Zealand Police (2012) List of deceased, as at 9 Feb 2012. New Zealand Police. Accessed 23 Feb 2012
  71. Nguyen LH, Shen HK, Ershoff D, Afifi AA, Bourque LB (2006) Exploring the causal relationship between exposure to the 1994 Northridge earthquake and pre- and post-earthquake preparedness activities. Earthq Spectra 22(3):569–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Palm R, Hodgson ME, Blanchard RD, Lyons D (1990) Earthquake insurance in California. Westview, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  73. Paton D (2003) Disaster preparedness: a social-cognitive perspective. Disaster Prev Manag 12(3):210–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Paton D (2005) Community resilience: integrating hazard management and community engagement. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the international conference on engaging communities, Brisbane, 14–17 Aug 2005Google Scholar
  75. Paton D (2006) Disaster resilience: integrating individual, community, institutional and environment perspectives. In: Paton D, Johnston D (eds) Disaster resilience. An integrated approach. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, pp 305–319Google Scholar
  76. Paton D (2007) Measuring and monitoring resilience in Auckland. GNS Science report 2007/18. GNS Science, Lower HuttGoogle Scholar
  77. Paton D, Johnston DM (2008) A means-end chain theory analysis of hazard cognitions and preparedness. GNS Science report 2008/19. GNS Science, Lower HuttGoogle Scholar
  78. Paton D, Smith L, Johnston DM (2000) Volcanic hazards: risk perception and preparedness. N Z J Psychol 29(2):86–91Google Scholar
  79. Paton D, Johnston D, Smith L, Millar M (2001a) Responding to hazard effects: promoting resilience and adjustment adoption. Aust J Emerg Manag 16(1):47–52Google Scholar
  80. Paton D, Millar M, Johnston D (2001b) Community resilience to volcanic hazard consequences. Nat Hazards 24:157–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Paton D, Smith L, Johnston D, Johnston M, Ronan K (2003) Developing a model to predict the adoption of natural hazard risk reduction and preparatory adjustments: EQC Research Project No. 01-479Google Scholar
  82. Paton D, Smith L, Johnston D (2005) When good intentions turn bad: promoting natural hazard preparedness. Aust J Emerg Manag 20(1):25–30Google Scholar
  83. Paton D, Kelly G, Bürgelt PT, Doherty M (2006a) Preparing for bushfires: understanding intentions. Disaster Prev Manag 15(4):566–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Paton D, McClure J, Bürgelt PT (2006b) Natural hazard resilience: the role of individual and household preparedness. In: Paton D, Johnston D (eds) Disaster resilience: an integrated approach. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, pp 105–124Google Scholar
  85. Paton D, Parkes B, Daly M, Smith L (2008) Fighting the flu: developing sustained community resilience and preparedness. Health Promot practice 9(4 Suppl):45S–53SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Paton D, Bajek R, Okada N, McIvor D (2010a) Predicting community earthquake preparedness: a cross-cultural comparison of Japan and New Zealand. Nat Hazards 54(3):765–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Paton D, Sagala S, Okada N, Jang L-J, Bürgelt PT, Gregg CE (2010b) Making sense of natural hazard mitigation: personal, social and cultural influences. Environ Hazards 9:183–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Perry RW, Lindell MK (2008) Volcanic risk perception and adjustment in a multi-hazard environment. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 172(3–4):170–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Petal M (2011) Earthquake casualties research and public education. In: Spence R, So E, Scawthorn C (eds) Human casualties in earthquakes: progress in modelling and mitigation. Springer, London, pp 25–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Richardson B (2005) The phases of disaster as a relationship between structure and meaning. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 23(3):27–54Google Scholar
  91. Rogers RW (1983) Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: a revised theory of protection motivation. In: Cacioppa J, Petty R (eds) Social psychophysiology. Guildford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  92. Rohrmann B (2000) A socio-psychological model for analyzing risk communication processes. Australas J Disaster Trauma Stud 2000:2.
  93. Ronan KR, Johnston DM (2005) Promoting community resilience in disasters. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  94. Ross L (1977) The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: distortions in the attribution process. In: Berkowitz L (ed) Advances in experimental social psychology, vol 10. Academic, New York, pp 173–220Google Scholar
  95. Russell LA, Goltz JD, Bourque LB (1995) Preparedness and hazard mitigation actions before and after two earthquakes. Environ Behav 27(6):744–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Rüstemli A, Karanci AN (1999) Correlates of earthquake cognitions and preparedness behavior in a victimized population. J Soc Psychol 139(1):91–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Şakioroğlu M, Karanci AN (2008) Positive outcomes of 1999 Duzce earthquake. A thesis proposal submitted to the graduate school of social sciences of Middle East Technical University. Department of Psychology, Middle East Technical UniversityGoogle Scholar
  98. Satriano C, Wu YM, Zollo A, Kanamori H (2011) Earthquake early warning: concepts, methods and physical grounds. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31(2):106–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Shinn M, Toohey SM (2003) Community contexts of human welfare. Annu Rev Sociol 54:427–459Google Scholar
  100. Slovic P (1993) Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Anal 13(6):675–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Smith W (2001) MM intensity with mean return period of 475 years. GNS Science diagram. GNS Science, Lower HuttGoogle Scholar
  102. Solberg C, Rossetto T, Joffe H (2010) The social psychology of seismic hazard adjustment: re-evaluating the international literature. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 10(8):1663–1677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Spence R, So E, Scawthorn C (2011) Introduction. In: Spence R, So E, Scawthorn C (eds) Human casualties in earthquakes: progress in modelling and mitigation. Springer, London, pp 1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Spittal MJ, McClure J, Siegert RJ, Walkey FH (2005) Optimistic bias in relation to preparedness for earthquakes. Australas J Disaster Trauma Stud 2005:1. Google Scholar
  105. Spittal MJ, McClure J, Siegert RJ, Walkey FH (2008) Predictors of two types of earthquake preparation: survival activities and mitigation activities. Environ Behav 40(6):798–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Stirling M, McVerry G, Berryman K, McGinty P, Villamor P, Van Dissen R, Dowrick D, Cousins J, Sutherland R (2000) Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment of New Zealand: new active fault data, seismicity data, attenuation relationships and methods. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences Client Report 2000/53. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences Ltd, Lower HuttGoogle Scholar
  107. Strauss AL, Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage, Newberry ParkGoogle Scholar
  108. Tierney KJ, Lindell MK, Perry RW (2001) Facing the unexpected: disaster preparedness and response in the United States. Joseph Henry Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  109. Turner RH, Nigg JM, Heller-Paz D (1986) Waiting for disaster: earthquake watch in California. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  110. Wood MM, Mileti DS, Kano M, Kelley MM, Regan R, Bourque LB (2011) Communicating actionable risk for terrorism and other hazards. Risk Anal. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01645.x Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julia S. Becker
    • 1
    • 2
  • Douglas Paton
    • 3
  • David M. Johnston
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kevin R. Ronan
    • 4
  1. 1.School of PsychologyMassey UniversityWellingtonNew Zealand
  2. 2.GNS ScienceLower HuttNew Zealand
  3. 3.School of PsychologyUniversity of TasmaniaLauncestonAustralia
  4. 4.Institute for Health and Social Science ResearchCentral Queensland UniversityRockhamptonAustralia

Personalised recommendations