skip to main content
10.1145/3657054.3657108acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesdg-oConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Harnessing Technology for Effective Emergency Communication: A Participatory Design Perspective

Published: 11 June 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Emergency communication is crucial in saving lives and avoiding property damage during natural or human-made disasters. Advancements in digital technologies have expanded the ability of emergency managers to reach citizens, particularly through the Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) system, which notifies citizens in a specific geographic area via their own mobile devices. There have been numerous studies from the perspective of citizens, but limited research has been conducted from the perspective of the message senders and focusing on the technology they use. This study aims to better understand the perspective of emergency managers by examining a case where a participatory design (PD) approach is utilized to create a digital tool that allows them to write messages more efficiently and effectively. We seek to understand the processes necessary to implement effective PD in a technology application used for emergency messaging and also investigate stakeholders’ needs and expectations, as well as the role of knowledge exchange during the design process.

References

[1]
Aedo, I. 2010. End-user oriented strategies to facilitate multi-organizational adoption of emergency management information systems. Information Processing & Management. 46, 1 (Jan. 2010), 11–21.
[2]
Atkinson, P. and Hammersley, M. 1994. Ethnography and participant observation. Handbook of Qualitative Research. N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, eds. SAGE. 248–261.
[3]
Bean, H. 2022. Exploring whether wireless emergency alerts can help impede the spread of Covid‐19. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 30, 2 (Jun. 2022), 185–203.
[4]
Bean, H. 2015. The Study of Mobile Public Warning Messages: A Research Review and Agenda. Review of Communication. 15, 1 (Jan. 2015), 60–80.
[5]
Boholm, Å. 2019. Risk Communication as Government Agency Organizational Practice. Risk Analysis. 39, 8 (Aug. 2019), 1695–1707.
[6]
Brooke, J. 1996. SUS - A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Evaluation In Industry. Taylor & Francis. 107–114.
[7]
Casteel, M.A. and Downing, J.R. 2016. Assessing Risk Following a Wireless Emergency Alert: Are 90 Characters Enough? Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. 13, 1 (Jan. 2016), 95–112.
[8]
Chen, T. 2024. Characterizing technology affordances, constraints, and coping strategies for information dissemination to the public: Insights from emergency messaging in US local governments. Government Information Quarterly. 41, 1 (Mar. 2024), 101910.
[9]
Chen, T. 2022. Cross-Boundary Information Sharing Flows in Emergency Management: Proposing a Conceptual Framework. DG.O 2022: The 23rd Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (Virtual Event Republic of Korea, Jun. 2022), 410–415.
[10]
Chen, T. 2023. Understanding Cross-Boundary Information Sharing in Emergency Management: Insights from Public Alert and Warning Messages in US Local Governments. Proceedings of the 24th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (Gdansk Poland, Jul. 2023), 486–495.
[11]
Davis, F.D. 1989. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly. 13, 3 (Sep. 1989), 319–340.
[12]
Deakin, M. 2011. The IntelCities Community of Practice: The Capacity-Building, Co-Design, Evaluation, and Monitoring of E-Government Services. Journal of Urban Technology. 18, 2 (2011), 17–38.
[13]
DHS S&T 2018. Report on Alerting Tactics. Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology.
[14]
Dixon, B. 2020. From making things public to the design of creative democracy: Dewey's democratic vision and participatory design. CoDesign. 16, 2 (Apr. 2020), 97–110.
[15]
Doermann, J.L. 2021. From Social Science Research to Engineering Practice: Development of a Short Message Creation Tool for Wildfire Emergencies. Fire Technology. 57, 2 (Mar. 2021), 815–837.
[16]
Drain, A. 2019. A Collaboration System Model for Planning and Evaluating Participatory Design Projects. International Journal of Design. 13, 3 (2019).
[17]
Emerson, R.M. 2011. Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. The University of Chicago Press.
[18]
FEMA 2023. Wireless Emergency Alerts.
[19]
Fountain, J.E. 2001. Building the virtual state: information technology and institutional change. Brookings Institution Press.
[20]
Ginige, A. 2014. Information Sharing Among Disaster Responders - An Interactive Spreadsheet-Based Collaboration Approach. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). 23, 4–6 (Dec. 2014), 547–583.
[21]
Goldkuhl, G. 2016. E-government design research: Towards the policy-ingrained IT artifact. Government Information Quarterly. 33, 3 (Jul. 2016), 444–452.
[22]
van den Haak, M.J. 2009. Evaluating municipal websites: A methodological comparison of three think-aloud variants. Government Information Quarterly. 26, 1 (2009), 193–202.
[23]
van den Haak, M.J. 2003. Retrospective vs. concurrent think-aloud protocols: Testing the usability of an online library catalogue. Behaviour & Information Technology. 22, 5 (Sep. 2003), 339–351.
[24]
Holmlid, S. 2009. Participative, co-operative, emancipatory: From participatory design to service design. (Oslo, Norway, 2009).
[25]
Huang, C.-M. 2010. Web 2.0 and Internet Social Networking: A New tool for Disaster Management? - Lessons from Taiwan. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 10, 57 (2010), 5.
[26]
Hussain, S. 2012. Participatory Design with Marginalized People in Developing Countries: Challenges and Opportunities Experienced in a Field Study in Cambodia. International Journal of Design. 6, 2 (2012), 91–109.
[27]
Kautz, K. 2011. Investigating the design process: participatory design in agile software development. Information Technology & People. 24, 3 (Aug. 2011), 217–235.
[28]
Kim, G. 2019. Wireless Emergency Alert messages: Influences on protective action behaviour. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 27, 4 (Dec. 2019), 374–386.
[29]
Kuligowski, E.D. 2023. Ember Alerts: Assessing Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) Messages in Wildfires Using the Warning Response Model. (2023).
[30]
Kuligowski, E.D. 2020. Field research to application: a study of human response to the 2011, Joplin tornado and its impact on alerts and warnings in the USA. Natural Hazards. 102, 3 (Jul. 2020), 1057–1076.
[31]
Lindell, M.K. and Perry, R.W. 2012. The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence: The Protective Action Decision Model. Risk Analysis. 32, 4 (Apr. 2012), 616–632.
[32]
Liu, B.F. 2017. Is a picture worth a thousand words? The effects of maps and warning messages on how publics respond to disaster information. Public Relations Review. 43, 3 (2017), 493–506.
[33]
Majchrzak, A. and Markus, M.L. 2013. Technology Affordances and Constraints in Management Information Systems (MIS). Encyclopedia of Management Theory. E. Kessler, ed. Sage Publications. 832–836.
[34]
Mileti, D.S. and Sorensen, J.H. 1990. Communication of emergency public warnings: A social science perspective and state-of-the-art assessment. Technical Report #ORNL-6609, 6137387.
[35]
Olson, M.K. 2024. A decade of wireless emergency alerts: A longitudinal assessment of message content and completeness. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 32, 1 (Mar. 2024), e12518.
[36]
Prasad, A. 2023. Human-Centric Design in Applications for Emergency Preparedness and Response in Rural Communities: The Case of the E!App. Proceedings of the 24th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (Gdansk Poland, Jul. 2023), 380–387.
[37]
Reuter, C. and Kaufhold, M.-A. 2018. Fifteen years of social media in emergencies: A retrospective review and future directions for crisis Informatics. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 26, 1 (Mar. 2018), 41–57.
[38]
Rushton, E. and Corrigan, S. 2021. Game-Assisted Assessment for Broader Adoption: Participatory Design and Game-Based Scaffolding. Electronic Journal of e-Learning. 19, 2 (Mar. 2021), 71–87.
[39]
Sadiq, A.-A. 2023. Public alert and warning system literature review in the USA: identifying research gaps and lessons for practice. Natural Hazards. 117, 2 (Jun. 2023), 1711–1744.
[40]
Saha, P. 2012. Evaluation of government e-tax websites: an information quality and system quality approach. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy. 6, 3 (2012), 300–321.
[41]
Saldaña, J. 2021. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE Publishing Inc.
[42]
Salman, Y.B. 2012. Icon and user interface design for emergency medical information systems: A case study. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 81, 1 (Jan. 2012), 29–35.
[43]
Schramm, W. 1974. Notes on Case Studies of Instructional Media Projects. Working paper for Academy of Educational Development, Washington DC. (1974).
[44]
Sutton, J. 2023. Communicating Hazard Location through Text-and-Map in Earthquake Early Warnings: A Mixed Methods Study. Natural Hazards Review. 24, 4 (Nov. 2023), 04023035.
[45]
Sutton, J. 2018. Designing Effective Tsunami Messages: Examining the Role of Short Messages and Fear in Warning Response. Weather, Climate, and Society. 10, 1 (Jan. 2018), 75–87.
[46]
Sutton, J. 2023. The Warning Lexicon: A Multiphased Study to Identify, Design, and Develop Content for Warning Messages. Natural Hazards Review. 25, 1 (Oct. 2023), 04023055.
[47]
Sutton, J. 2021. Tornado Warning Guidance and Graphics: Implications of the Inclusion of Protective Action Information on Perceptions and Efficacy. Weather, Climate, and Society. (Oct. 2021).
[48]
Sutton, J. and Kuligowski, E.D. 2019. Alerts and Warnings on Short Messaging Channels: Guidance from an Expert Panel Process. Natural Hazards Review. 20, 2 (May 2019), 04019002.
[49]
Thomas, M. 2023. Emergency risk communication and sensemaking during smoke events: A survey of practitioners. Risk Analysis. 43, 2 (Feb. 2023), 358–371.
[50]
Tornatzky, L.G. 1990. The processes of technological innovation. Lexington Books.
[51]
Venkatesh, V. 2014. A usability evaluation of the Obamacare website. Government Information Quarterly. 31, 4 (Oct. 2014), 669–680.
[52]
Watts‐Englert, J. and Yang, E. 2021. Using a Codesign Workshop to Make an Impact with Codesign Research. Design Management Journal. 16, 1 (Oct. 2021), 111–124.
[53]
Wood, M.M. 2018. Milling and Public Warnings. Environment and Behavior. 50, 5 (Jun. 2018), 535–566.
[54]
Wright, P.C. and Monk, A.F. 1991. The use of think-aloud evaluation methods in design. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin. 23, 1 (Jan. 1991), 55–57.
[55]
Yin, R.K. 1989. Case study research : design and methods. Sage Publications.
[56]
Yuan, Q. 2021. Digital government: analytical models, underlying theories, and emergent theoretical perspective. Handbook of Theories of Public Administration and Management. T.A. Bryer, ed. Edward Elgar Publishing.
[57]
Yuan, Q. 2023. Does Co-creation Affect the Adoption of IT-enabled Solutions? The Case of a Mobile Application for Emergency Preparedness. Proceedings of the 56th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2023).

Index Terms

  1. Harnessing Technology for Effective Emergency Communication: A Participatory Design Perspective

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    dg.o '24: Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research
    June 2024
    1089 pages
    ISBN:9798400709883
    DOI:10.1145/3657054
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 11 June 2024

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Funding Sources

    Conference

    dg.o 2024

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 150 of 271 submissions, 55%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 116
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)116
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)22
    Reflects downloads up to 22 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format.

    HTML Format

    Login options

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media