Public Response to Official Information on Cancer and Cancer Clusters

Official information about cancer and cancer clusters from state health departments clashes with lay views. A few studies have covered site-specific communication by telephone and public meetings, and hypothetical messages, but not generic information actually provided. Public response to such information was probed with a random survey of New Jersey households (n = 327), part of a quasi-experiment contrasting the agency's cognitive message and an alternative message adding procedural and affective information. Respondents rated both information types as understandable, helpful, and trustworthy, particularly among those trusting the agency, agreeing with officials’ views of facts, and with low concern about local clusters. Anxiety about cancer, aversion to uncertainty, cancer experience, and familiarity with clusters or the agency did not affect responses. Agreeing with officially defined facts (knowledge) was associated with trust in the agency and concern about clusters, but scepticism about expert knowledge. Information exposure increased trust, belief in expert knowledge (except on whether cancers cluster), and (some) factual knowledge, but also increased self-reported concern among those already concerned. These findings suggest that, absent specific learning, people believe scientific information is understandable, helpful, and trustworthy when they already trust experts and institutions; people with prior distrust offer less positive evaluations.