The DOI matches its Crossref record; 114 of the 114 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence
Abstract
The Protective Action Decision Model (PADM) is a multistage model that is based on findings from research on people's responses to environmental hazards and disasters. The PADM integrates the processing of information derived from social and environmental cues with messages that social sources transmit through communication channels to those at risk. The PADM identifies three critical predecision processes (reception, attention, and comprehension of warnings or exposure, attention, and interpretation of environmental/social cues)—that precede all further processing. The revised model identifies three core perceptions—threat perceptions, protective action perceptions, and stakeholder perceptions—that form the basis for decisions about how to respond to an imminent or long‐term threat. The outcome of the protective action decision‐making process, together with situational facilitators and impediments, produces a behavioral response. In addition to describing the revised model and the research on which it is based, this article describes three applications (development of risk communication programs, evacuation modeling, and adoption of long‐term hazard adjustments) and identifies some of the research needed to address unresolved issues.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Additional items were developed based on key constructs from theoretical frameworks such as the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) (Witte, 1992) and the Protective Action Decision Model (PADM) (Lindell & Perry, 2012).”
From Assessing earthquake preparedness in a culturally diverse international students population: a case of Ehime university in Shikoku, Japan (2025) · cites this paper as Lindell & Perry, 2012
Citations
Cites
“Stress: appraisal and coping,”
Folkman, S. (2013) · Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_215 · Cited by 27,833
Book Review: The Psychology of Attitudes
Chakravarti, D., Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1997) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151869 · Cited by 7,173
A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change1
Rogers, R. W. (1975) · The Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803 · Cited by 6,805
Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change
Marquart, F., & Naderer, B. (2015) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-09923-7_20 · Cited by 5,011
French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. H. (1986) · University of Pittsburgh Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/jj.12381759.38 · Cited by 4,544
Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment
(1978) · Evaluation and Program Planning · doi:10.1016/0149-7189(78)90042-3 · Cited by 3,956
How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits
Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S. W., & Combs, B. (1978) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf00143739 · Cited by 2,838
Predicting and Changing Behavior
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2011) · doi:10.4324/9780203838020 · Cited by 2,807
A Meta‐Analysis of Research on Protection Motivation Theory
Floyd, D. L., Prentice‐Dunn, S., & Rogers, R. W. (2000) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02323.x · Cited by 2,527
THE NATURE OF BELIEF SYSTEMS IN MASS PUBLICS
Converse, P. E. (2004) · Aarhus University Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/jj.35529187.18 · Cited by 2,497
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- Mileti D S SorensenJH.Why people take precautions against natural disasters. Pp.296–320inWeinsteinN(ed).Taking Care: Why People Take Precautions. New York :Cambridge University Press 1987.
- BurtonI Kates R WhiteGF.The Environment as Hazard 2nd edition. New York :Guildford Press 1993.
- McGuireWJ.The nature of attitudes and attitude change. Pp.329–334inLindseyG AronsonE(eds).Handbook of Social Psychology 2nd edition. Reading MA :Addison‐Wesley 1969.
- McGuireWJ.The nature of attitudes and attitude change. Pp.233–256inLindseyG AronsonE(eds).Handbook of Social Psychology 3rd edition. New York :Random House 1985.
- RogersGO SorensenJH.Diffusion of emergency warnings.Environmental Professional 1988;10:185–198.
- PalmR HodgsonM Blanchard RD LyonsD.Earthquake Insurance in California. Boulder CO :Westview Press 1990.
- DavisMS.Living along the fault line: An update on earthquake awareness and preparedness in Southern California.Urban Resources 1989;5:8–14.
- GarciaEM.Earthquake preparedness in California: A survey of Irvine residents.Urban Resources 1989;5:15–19.
- WitheyS.Reaction to uncertain threat. Pp.93–123inBakerG ChapmanD(eds).Man and Society in Disaster. New York :Basic Books 1962.
- BakerEJ.Hurricane evacuation in the United States. Pp.98–108inPielkeRJr PielkeRSr(eds).Storms Vol .1. London :Routledge 2000.
- ProchaskaJO JohnsonS LeeP.The transtheoretical model of behavior change. Pp.59–84inGochmanDS(ed).Handbook of Health Behavior Research I: Personal and Social Determinants. New York :Plenum Press 1997.
- SchumanH KaltonG.Survey methods. Pp.635–698inLindzeyG AronsonE(eds).The Handbook of Social Psychology 3rd edition Vol.1. Reading MA :Addison‐Wesley 1985.
- GladwinH PeacockWG.Warning and evacuation: A night for hard houses. Pp.52–74inPeacockWG MorrowBH GladwinH(eds).Hurricane Andrew: Gender Ethnicity and the Sociology of Disasters. London :Routledge 1997.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards
Wachinger, G., Renn, O., Begg, C., & Kuhlicke, C. (2012) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01942.x · Cited by 2,301
Meta-analyses of factors motivating climate change adaptation behaviour
van Valkengoed, A. M., & Steg, L. (2019) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/s41558-018-0371-y · Cited by 940
Evacuation transportation modeling: An overview of research, development, and practice
Murray‐Tuite, P. M., & Wolshon, B. (2013) · Transportation Research Part C Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1016/j.trc.2012.11.005 · Cited by 501
Who Leaves and Who Stays? A Review and Statistical Meta-Analysis of Hurricane Evacuation Studies
Huang, S., Lindell, M. K., & Prater, C. S. (2015) · Environment and Behavior · doi:10.1177/0013916515578485 · Cited by 436
Self-citationEl‐Said, O. A., & Aziz, H. (2021) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/0047287521997567 · Cited by 407
Metadata
- Authors
- Lindell, M. K., & Perry, R. W.
- Affiliations
- Texas A&M University (US)
- Arizona State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lindell, Michael K.
- ORCID
- Lindell, Michael K.
- Venue
- Risk Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-06-20
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 616-632
- ISSN
- 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-6924
- OpenAlex
- W2139452699
- Semantic Scholar
- 01136b8cc8a5b5fcf6bcd2578fb3cfef2acb6b4d
- Cited by
- 1,868
- References
- 114
- Citations by year
- 2026: 268 · 2025: 212 · 2024: 198 · 2023: 176 · 2022: 205 · 2021: 182 · 2020: 140 · 2019: 104 · 2018: 110 · 2017: 88 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 82.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Risk Analysis (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
- Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
- Keywords
- Protective Action Decision Model, environmental hazards, disaster response, risk communication, evacuation modeling, threat perception, stakeholder perspectives, social cues
- MeSH terms
- Decision Making, Decision Support Techniques, Disasters, Humans, Perception, Risk, Hazardous Substances, Risk Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review