We currently have several projects underway. Please read below to learn more about our projects:

Threat Orientations. Over the last two years, the Social Research Center has completed several research projects developing the Threat Orientation Model (TOM). This model outlines the different ways in which people react when hearing their safety is at risk, such as hearing that they are at increased likelihood of acquiring a disease or of becoming a victim of a crime.

The threat orientation model posits that people respond to threats in four different ways. With a control-based threat orientation, people will engage in practical behaviors to minimize their risk, and thus reduce anxiety. Alternately, people with a heightened sensitivity-based orientation engage in “overkill” risk-reduction behavior that exceeds the level of the threat but does not decrease anxiety. Others with an optimistic denial-based orientation underestimate their risk and thus feel little anxiety. Finally, people with an avoidance denial-based orientation avoid thinking about a threat in an effort to minimize anxiety.

We have developed a measure to assess these different types of responses, and have found that these responses do have implications for one's anxiety and reactions to threatening health information. To learn more about our findings, please click HERE. Please click to download the LONG FORM or the SHORT FORM of our measure.

In a recent study, funded by the National Science Foundation, we looked at how threat orientations influence individuals' interpretations of well-known health and safety threats like identity theft and West Nile Virus. When people see information about these common threats, do they realize that this could happen to them, or do they instead decide that they are not at risk? Do they decide to take steps to protect themselves from these risks? Our research shows that people with control-based and heightened sensitivity-based threat orientations feel that these threats could indeed happen to them and intend to do something to protect themselves. However, people with an optimistic denial-based orientation are less likely to believe that they are at risk and do not intend to take protective action.

We are extending this research to uncover how these different threat orientations influence basic information processing and guide health and safety behaviors. We hope to answer questions such as: What cognitive defenses do people use to convince themselves they are not at risk, even if they are? What conditions are necessary to get people to engage in actual behavioral change to protect themselves? How do threat orientations relate to emotions?

Illusions of Control in Everyday Situations. The Social Research Center completed several research projects examining illusions of control. An illusion of control is a tendency to overestimate the amount of control one has in a given situation. For example, a gambler might believe that they have control over chance gambling outcomes, such as the roll of a die, the draw of a card, or the spinning of a roulette wheel.

Reactions to the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks. This year-long project, funded by the National Science Foundation, examined the general public's reactions to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Five hundred and one individuals ranging in age from 18 to 101 (M = 52.9, SD = 20.8; Mdn = 54) completed 45-minute long interviews the second year following the attacks in which they were asked to reflect on their reactions to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, their current anxiety and fear of flying, and methods by which they coped with this event.

We found that most respondents reported that distress increased immediately after the attacks and had decreased by the time of the interview. However, for a sizeable minority distress levels had not returned to their pre-attack levels. Those participants who reported that they used avoidance and distraction are currently more distressed and have more fear of flying, while those who tend to think about and deal with their problems are less distressed. In addition, the participants who felt they understood why the attacks happened and who focused on ways in which their risk is low are less distressed. To learn more about our findings from the 9/11 study, please click HERE.

If you would like to learn more about any of our projects, please contact us either by email at trr04747@pomona.edu, or by calling us at (909) 607-7734.