Preparedness and Hazard Mitigation Actions before and after Two Earthquakes
Abstract
This study examines the current state of preparedness among Los Angeles County and San Francisco Bay Area residents, determines the extent to which levels of preparedness have changed since the Sylmar earthquake in 1971, identifies the circumstances under which people have prepared, and assesses the extent to which respondents' overall perceptions of preparedness match their reports of preparedness activities. Since the 1970s, residents of the two areas have increased their level of survival activities substantially, but progress in home-hazard mitigation and family earthquake planning has generally remained constant and low. Pre-earthquake preparedness was predicted by home ownership, income, education, marital status, number of children at home, number of years in the neighborhood, and number of earthquakes experienced. In contrast, post-earthquake preparedness was predicted by proximity to the earthquake epicenter, earthquake-related experiences, fear, and levels of pre-earthquake preparedness.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
International assistance can usually mobilize funds and response measures within the first 72 h after the disaster.
“International assistance can usually mobilize funds and response measures within the first 72 h after the disaster (Russell et al. 1995; Peters and Kraas 2014; UNOCHA 2017a).”
From Disaster preparedness and resilience at household level in Yangon, Myanmar (2022) · cites this paper as Russell et al. 1995
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence
Lindell, M. K., & Perry, R. W. (2012) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01647.x · Cited by 1,868 · see citing works
Generic sources of disaster communities: a social network approach
Kirschenbaum, A. (2004) · International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy · doi:10.1108/01443330410791073 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
The Tenure Trap: The Vulnerability of Renters to Joint Natural and Technological Disasters
Burby, R. J., Steinberg, L. J., & Basolo, V. (2003) · Urban Affairs Review · doi:10.1177/1078087403253053 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Disaster preparedness and resilience at household level in Yangon, Myanmar
Heinkel, S.-B., Thiebes, B., Than, Z. M., Aung, T., Kyi, T. T., Mar, W. L., Oo, S. S., Miller, C., Willkomm, M., Maung, W., et al. (2022) · Natural Hazards · doi:10.1007/s11069-022-05226-w · Cited by 43 · see citing works
- Authors
- Russell, L. A., Goltz, J. D., & Bourque, L. B.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University (US)
- EQE International's Spedal
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- ORCID
- Goltz, James D.
- Venue
- Environment and Behavior
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1995-11
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 744-770
- ISSN
- 0013-9165 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-390X
- OpenAlex
- W1976884628
- Cited by
- 358
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 8.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Environment and Behavior (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
- Social Sciences › Transportation › Earthquake and Disaster Impact Studies
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Disaster Response and Management
- Keywords
- earthquake preparedness, hazard mitigation, Los Angeles County, San Francisco Bay Area, earthquake fear, post-earthquake behavior
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