As predicted by Grunig's theory, the problem facers were separated from the fatals by interpersonal discussion (.
52) was associated with the problem facers on function 1 and believability separated the routines (-.
Level of involvement, which was measured by the perceived importance of the earthquake prediction, separated the problem facers (.
The perceived influence of discussions with other people did separate the problem facers (.
The problem facers were more likely than other publics to talk about the earthquake problem, and they perceived that those discussions had an influence on their perception of the importance of the problem.
The problem facers and the routines, who believed they could do something to protect themselves from an earthquake, believed that other people in the area could also protect themselves from the earthquake.
Perceived preparedness and willingness to pay more taxes did separate the problem facers and routines from the fatals and the constrained on two functions.
In developing these programs, less emphasis may need to be directed at the problem facers and routines, who appeared to have a better understanding of earthquake preparedness than did the constrained and fatals.