Journol of Communiry Psychology,

1982. 10, 23-28.

COMMUNITY PERCEPTIONS O F NATURAL DISASTERS AND POST-DISASTER MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES*

G L E N N E. SHIPPEE A N D RICHARD BRADFORD
W. LARRY GREGORY

University of Missouri-Kansas Ciiy

New Mexico State Universiry

This research was designed to examine the cognitive and affective responses of residential dwellers in the aftermath of a natural disaster (a flood). In a 2 X 3 factorial design, the effects of fear (High, Medium, and Low) and sex on perceptions of the disaster were assessed. The results indicated that respondents who were highly fearful of the disaster were more likely than moderate or low fear respondents to believe that: a) additional flooding would occur in their vicinity, and b) that they resided closer to the flood zone than they actually did. The policy implications of the results suggested that post-disaster mental health services might have to be extended to include residents of geographical areas not directly affected by natural or man-made disasters.

The earth and its inhabitants are susceptible to natural hazards (e.g., earthquakes, landslides, floods), and man-made hazards (e.g., terrorist attacks, fatal automobile and air crashes, air and water pollution, building and structural failures). An emergent area of research and service in community mental health has focused on the delivery of mental health and crisis intervention services to victims of environmental disasters (Frederick, 1977; Parad, Resnik, & Parad, 1974; Tuchman, 1973). A variety of mental health services have been established by mental health professionals immediately following a disaster, as well as over longer follow-up periods. Examples of short-term interventions have included telephone crisis services and paraprofessional visitation programs (McGee, 1974; McGee & Heffron, 1976; Richard, 1974). Populations such as the elderly, children, or other indigent and dependent persons often required longer term and more intensive services following a natural or man-made disaster. Various individual and group counseling programs have been designed specifically for these populations (Blaufarb & Levine, 1972; Hartsough, Zarle, & Ottinger, 1974). Despite these efforts, the planning and implementation of mental health services for disaster victims has often proceeded without a strong empirical research base. Very little systematic research has gathered or analyzed the cognitive and affective responses of disaster victims in the aftermath of natural or man-made disasters. In particular, virtually no research has focused on the relationships between victims perceptions of environmental disasters, the emotional responses which these events elicit in victims, and the variables which might influence the provision of mental health services to victims of disasters (e.g., proximity to disaster area, damage sustained by residents property). Studies by Bucher (1957) and Shippee, Burroughs, and Wakefield (1980) represent two notable exceptions to this assertion. Bucher assessed the affective responses of residential victims of an airline crash and found that feelings of guilt and hostility were prevalent among respondents. Shippee et al. surveyed the residents of two apartment complexes in the aftermath of a gangland style slaying (an automobile bombing). One complex was subdivided into two groups of dwellings. One group of dwellings was operationalized as geographically proximate to the disaster site. A second group of dwellings was operationalized as geographically distant from the disaster zone. These two groups were contrasted to a control complex. This complex was the same geographic
Send reprint requests to first author, Department of Psychology, 5319 Holmes Street, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, MO 641 10.

23

24

G L E N N E . SHIPPEE, RICHARD BRADFORD, A N D W. LARRY GREGORY

distance from the explosion site as the geographically distant group, but possessed a different proper name. Residents randomly selected from all three of the complexes were requested to estimate the likelihood of other, similar environmental disasters occurring in their vicinity. The results obtained by Shippee et al. were unexpected. They found that respondents in the explosion-distant group were more likely than residents in the remaining two groups to believe that similar environmental disasters could occur in their area. On the other hand, control and explosion-proximate respondents did not differ in their estimates of the probability of additional disasters occurring in their vicinity. What these results tentatively led to was the nonintuitive hypothesis that residents who were the least affected by an environmental disaster, may initially be as fearful, emotionally distraught, and in need of services as those residents who suffered extensively from a disaster. With respect to the planning, design, and provision of mental health and crisis intervention services in natural and man-made disaster contexts, the Shippee et al. results potentially have great practical significance. Specifically, they suggest that mental health policy development and program planning in post-disaster contexts should reflect the provision of services in areas that may not be directly affected, but are located in close geographic proximity to a disaster zone. Prior to advocating such a policy, however, this research was conducted in order to conceptually replicate the original Shippee et al. results. This was accomplished by capitalizing on an unexpected tragedy (a flood) that struck a western metropolitan community. The occurrence of this natural disaster permitted the reinvestigation of the relationship between perceived levels of fearfulness, respondents predictions concerning the possibility of further disasters occurring in an area, and respondents estimates of their geographic proximity to the disaster area in the aftermath of a dangerous natural hazard. A second product of the present research was that it permitted the possible extension of the generalizability of the earlier results obtained by Shippee to a natural disaster context as opposed to a man-made disaster context.

METHOD 0 vervie w Twenty-four hours following the occurrence of an extremely damaging flood, onehundred-sixty-three persons residing in and around heavily flooded areas were surveyed. A 2 X 3 intact block design was formed which reflected three levels of fear (high, medium, and low) and two levels of gender. The primary dependent variables were respondents predictions of further flooding, the amount of distance perceived to exist by residents between the heavily flooded zone and their own residences, and the actual geographic distance between respondents residences and the flooded area. Respondents and Setting Participants in the research resided in and around the Phoenix metropolitan area and were in attendance at classes offered by and through Arizona State University. In April of 1978, flooding of the Salt River (rated as a 100-year flood by the U S . Army Corps of Engineers) led to several personal injuries, death, and extensive property damage in several sections of the Pheonix, Arizona metropolitan area. The flood and subsequent clean-up efforts received national evening news coverage for a 2 to 3 day period. Yet another indication of the force of the flood is connoted by the fact that four reinforced concrete bridges (one an interstate highway bridge) were either closed or

NATURAL DISASTERS

25

damaged. Several weeks were required before these bridges were repaired and reopened to traffic. Local news coverage followed for several weeks after the flooding. One day following the major flooding, a hastily constructed questionnaire was administered to Phoenix residents who were in attendance at undergraduate, as well as adult continuing education classes offered in the evening by Arizona State University. Respondents were informed that the purpose of the questionnaire was to assess persons responses to the flooding that had just occurred in the area. Design and Dependent Variables The items of primary concern were embedded among a larger number of questionnaire items included on the instrument. This procedure was used to render the hypotheses of the research less obvious to respondents. One item (How fearful are you of the recent flooding that has occurred in the area?) requested respondents to indicate on a nine-point scale (1 = not at all fearful; 9 = highly fearful), the degree to which the flooding had made them fearful. To conceptually replicate the Shippee et al. study, a three-way median split was performed on this item to produce three groups of respondents who differed in their level of fear of the flood (high, medium, and low). Crossed to form a 2 X 3 intact block design was gender of respondent. Respondents geographic location was obtained by having respondents report their addresses. In addition, respondents were also asked to indicate (with a check mark) the location of their residences on a map included with the questionnaire. The map was designed to portray an outline of the metropolitan area and had a small number of key reference points. This item was scored later by determining the amount of distance (in millimeters) that respondents perceived (perceived distance) to exist between their residences and the nearest heavily flooded area. To assess respondents estimates of the probability of additional flooding occurring within their area, the following item was included with a nine-point scale ( 1 = Highly Likely; 9 = Highly Unlikely): What is the likelihood that additional flooding will occur in your area? Finally, a second measure of geographic distance (actual distance) was constructed on a post hoc basis by locating respondents residences on a 1979 Gousha map of the Phoenix metropolitan area. The distance between their residences and the nearest flood zone was obtained (in millimeters) and recorded.

RES LTS u An examination of the results of 2 X 3 (Gender X Fear) analyses of variance performed on all of the dependent variables indicated that, in each case, no gender main effects or interactions involving gender emerged. Consequently, the data were collapsed across gender for further analysis and reporting purposes. Environmental Disaster Perception Table 1 shows respondents probability estimates of the likelihood of additional flooding occurring in their areas. A highly significant main effect for fear was obtained, F (2, 157) = 10.55, p < .001. Application of the Scheffe test indicated that each mean differed significantly from the others at thep < .05 level. This pattern of means indicated
While the external validity of the study could have been increased by surveying nonuniversity-affiliated community residents, the investigators had no manpower resources to mount such an investigation on such short notice. Consequently, every effort was made to identify university classes (e.g., evening continuing and adult education classes) that would contain a wide variety of community residents with respect to age, geographic location, background, and the like.

26

GLENN E. SHIPPEE, RICHARD BRADFORD, AND W . LARRY GREGORY

that residents who were highly fearful of the flooding were more likely than low fear or moderate fear respondents to believe that additional flooding would occur in their area. Moderate fear residents, in turn, were more likely than low fear residents to believe that additional flooding might occur.
TABLE 1 Mean Probability of Flood Reoccurrence Estimates and Perceived Distance Estimates From Flood Zone Fear Level Medium
6.28 43.55

Low Probability of Reoccurrence Distance Perception 7.758 50.42b

High 5.44 31.27

SLower numbers indicate higher perceived probabilities. bDistance estimates in millimeters.

Perceived Distance and Actual Geographic Location The analysis of variance indicated that no significant effects characterized the actual distance measure compiled following the completion of the research. That is, respondents lived equidistant from the flood zone across the three fear groups. An analysis of respondents estimates of the distance (perceived distance) between their residences and the flood zone, however, did lead to a marginally significant main < effect for fear, F ( 2 , 157) = 2 . 5 1 , ~ .08. To further explore this difference, post hoc contrasts were applied to the means shown in Table 1. This analysis indicated that respondents who were highly fearful of the flood were more likely to estimate that they resided closer to the flood zone than medium or low fear respondents, F (1, 157) = 7.19, p < .01. The latter two groups did not differ significantly, however.

DISCUSSION The most significant results of this research concerned the responses of those residential dwellers who were highly fearful of the flooding. These residents were more likely than low or moderate fear respondents to believe that they resided extremely close to the flood zone. In reality, however, these residents lived in housing no closer to the flood zone than moderate or low fear residents. The second notable finding related to respondents predictions of the likelihood of further flooding occurring in their areas. High fear respondents were more likely than moderate or low fear respondents to believe that further flooding was highly probable. Apparently, highly fearful respondents were manifesting cognitions that were consistent with their high fear levels. These results corroborate and are conceptually consistent with the Shippee et al. (1980) study. Recal.1 that Shippee et al. found that residents who resided in an apartment complex in which a disaster had occurred were more likely than residents equally distant (but outside of the hazard zone) to believe that other negative events could occur. The present study is consistent with this result and also suggests that fear (unmeasured in the Shippee et al. study) may have differentiated these groups. More specifically, in the

N A T U R A L DISASTERS

27

Shippee et al. study, it may have been the case that residents living within the complex that experienced the disaster may have been more fearful than residents who resided in the complex that did not experience the disaster. There are several important policy implications of this investigation for the design of post-disaster mental health services for communities that are afflicted by a natural or man-made disaster. The results suggest that post-disaster mental health services should be extended to include those residential areas not directly affected by the disaster. That is, current disaster planning for mental health and crisis intervention services usually includes only those areas that are directly affected (in suffering property losses or personal injuries). Yet, the present research indicates that mental health facilities in communities adjacent to areas in which a disaster occurs should have a contingency plan ready for implementation. Potential services in the plan might include a disaster information center, an organized dissemination network, or a community visitation program. To provide these services, civil defense workers, neighborhood association representatives, Red Cross volunteers, nursing association members, the clergy, and the like might be trained for deployment during crisis periods (Hartsough, Zarle, & Ottinger, 1974). Note that the underlying theme of all of these interventions is an educative one, with the main intervention objective being the provision of accurate information to residents concerning a nearby disaster. Theoretically, such information would prevent the formation of stressarousing rumors (Richard, 1979) and would allay the unrealistic fears of residents. Prior to adopting a policy response like that suggested above, however, additional research in the disaster perception area is necessary. One legitimate criticism of the present research is its low level of external or ecological validity. For instance, the elderly (over 65), handicapped persons, low-income persons, and persons of less than average education were underrepresented in the sample. In addition, the present study only assessed self-reported fearfulness and not psychological distress that was translated into the behavioral act of seeking psychological or crisis intervention services. As a result, future research in the area of post-disaster mental health services should assess the frequency and types of service requests received by the mental health system subsequent to natural or man-made disasters. This assessment of service usage could include a comparison of rates of service usage with normal, post-disaster rates of utilization. Using this paradigm it would be possible to examine the responses of community residents to varying types of disasters (man-made versus natural). Similarly, this research strategy could also be used to determine if communities of different design, size, composition; or communities which are differentially susceptible to disasters respond differentially when they occur. Much important research remains to be conducted in this area.

REFERENCES
BLAUFARB, & LEVINE, Crisis intervention in an earthquake. Social Work, 1972, 17, 16-19. H., J. BUCHER, Blame and hostility in disaster. American Journal of Sociology, 1957, 62, 467-475. R. FREDERICK, Current thinking about crisis or psychological intervention in United States disasters. Mass C. Emergencies, 1977, 2, 43-50. HARTSOUGH, ZARLE,T., & OTTINGER, Tornado recovery: The development of a professional D., D. paraprofessional response to a disaster. Journal of Community Psychology, 1974, 2 , 31 1-320. MCGEE,R. Crisis infervention in the community. Baltimore, Maryland: University Park Press, 1974.

28

G L E N N E . S H I P P E E , R I C H A R D B R A D F O R D , A N D W . LA R R Y GREGORY

MCGEE, & HEFFRON, The role of crisis intervention services in disaster recovery. In H. Parad, H. R., E. Resnik, and L. Parad (Eds.), Emergency and disaster management. Bowie, Maryland: Charles Press, 1976. L. PARAD, RESNIK, H., & PARAD, Emergency and disaster management. Bowie, Maryland: Charles H., Press, 1976. RICHARD, Crisis intervention services following natural disaster: The Pennsylvania Recovery Project. W. Journal of Community Psychology, 1914, 2 , 21 1-219. SriitwE, G. E., BURROUGHS,& WAKEFIELD, Dissonance theory revisited: Perception of environmental J., S. hazards in residential areas. Environment and Behavior, 1980, 12, 33-51. TUCHMAN, Disaster and mental health intervention. Community Mental Health Journal, 1973,9, 151-157. A.