Dear colleagues,
Please circulate to anyone who may be interested in the following post.
Best,
Angela Cassidy
--
Dr Angela Cassidy
Research Fellow in Risk Communication
Leeds University Business School
Maurice Keyworth Building
University of Leeds
Leeds, LS2 9JT
email: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
tel: 0113 384 6080
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research Officer/Fellow in Perception and Communication of Terrorist
Risk. Job ref 316001
Leeds University Business School
Closing Date: 4-10-2005
Further details:
Available for a fixed term of two years starting as soon as possible.
You will work on an ESRC funded project entitled 'Perception and
Communication of the Risk of Terrorism' awarded jointly to the Schools
of Business, Education, and Law and the Institute of Psychological
Sciences, under the New Security Challenges Programme. The research is
in two phases. Phase One involves focus groups, analysed by means of
metaphor and attributional analyses to identify how different
stakeholders conceptualise and act in the face of terrorism. Phase Two
involves field experiments developed from the Phase One results to
test predictions about effective risk communication.
In addition to possessing a first and a higher degree (or other
research experience) in a relevant subject area e.g., psychology,
sociology, applied linguistics, communications, decision sciences, you
will have knowledge of social science research methods and experience
of undertaking research of a kind relevant to this project.
Research 1A: (£19,460 pa)
The University is introducing a new reward framework which will
facilitate the recruitment, retention and motivation of world class
staff
Informal enquiries to Professor John Maule (tel 0113 343 2622 email
[log in to unmask])
To apply on line visit www.leeds.ac.uk and click on 'jobs, application
packs are also available from Pat McDermott, tel 0113 343 4454 email
[log in to unmask]
Background to the research
The first phase of the project will investigate, using complementary
psychological and applied linguistic perspectives, the effects of the
background level of terrorist threat upon the processes by which
members of the public conceptualise, interpret, and assess terrorist
risk (and how this varies across groups differentiated by age, social
class and social group). Through a series of focus groups with members
of the general public, we will ask questions such as: How do people
feel when the government says they should be 'alert, but not alarmed'?
Do they think the authorities should issue warnings when they have
information that an attack might occur, even if they don't have
specific details? What effect does this have on society? And are they
concerned about human rights in the context of the 'war on terror'?
These are complex questions without simple answers, and focus groups
will provide rich, detailed data. A further set of focus groups with
experts (police, local authority, media etc) will allow us to consider
differences between lay and expert beliefs.
We will use two complementary methods to analyze these data. Analysis
of the metaphors used in discourse will reveal the cognitive frames
that people use to describe terrorist threat, and the values
encapsulated within. A separate attributional analysis will identify
the causal expectations that underlie people's behaviour in response
to the risk of terrorism. Integration of these two analyses will
provide a powerful interpretation of the psychological factors
underlying the public's response to security issues, and the
linguistic mechanisms by which these are achieved. It will also enable
us to make predictions that will be tested in the second phase of the
project. This second phase will involve three field experiments
utilizing realistic hypothetical scenarios (devised in conjunction
with experts) to investigate how the public would like to be informed
about particular risks associated with terrorism, and the consequences
of particular communication strategies. The specific hypotheses will
depend on the focus group analyses, but a typical question might be:
would the public prefer to be informed of a terrorist risk early (when
details are vague) or late (when details are more precise, but there
is less time to take action); what are the consequences of these
communication decisions on what the public would do, how concerned or
worried they would be, and on their trust in the security agencies?
We anticipate that the research will have important implications for
public authorities (such as the police and local authorities, who are
legally obliged to provide effective public warnings of terrorist
threats) in meeting the information needs of the public and enabling
them to make informed decisions. It will also make a significant
contribution to psychological theory, and in particular to the social
amplification of risk framework, that explains how people perceive and
act in the face of risk.
Further details of the post can be found at:
http://wwwnotes2.leeds.ac.uk/jobs/unijob.nsf/Research?OpenView
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to [log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail
2. To resume email from the list, send the following message:
set psci-com mail
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
leave psci-com
4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list archive,
can be found at the list web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication and science
and society can be found at http://psci-com.org.uk
**********************************************************************
|