**2. Communicating during a health crises**

Pandemics qualify as a form of health crisis [1]. As crises present situations for which individuals are neither prepared nor possess knowledge of how to deal with the uncertain circumstances [15], they actively seek support and guidance [16, 17]. In order to mobilize the affected public as a partner [18, 19], individuals' need for information must be satisfied. Useful information is usually based on scientific facts. Following the Office and Science and Technology [20], science communication comprises all communication activities between different stakeholder groups, and, as in the case of a health crisis, takes place between "the government and the public". In line with Burns et al. [21], one of the many objectives of science communication is to raise awareness for and create familiarity with new aspects of science. Consisting of three separate processes – i.e. communication, consultation and participation [22] – science communication needs to be designed strategically to fill existing (knowledge) gaps and present information in an appealing manner [23]. Only this way, the public's understanding of science can be assured [21]1 .

Media messages afford individuals with instruction and, thus, present respondents' primary sources of information in crises [26–28]. Message credibility and trust is elevated, if the government is the identified source [12, 29], highlighting its central role in the crisis management process [6, 7]. On the one hand, it can help sensitize people for the risks associated with the crisis and, on the other hand, encourage them to adopt preventive measures [30]. For this reason, governmental officials are advised to invest in "well-coordinated health communications" to assist individuals in managing their daily lives in times of upheaval [31]. Previous studies have investigated how the public responds to a government's overall health risk communication, for instance during the avian influenza [12], SARS [32], or Ebola [33]. Findings confirm that the government is perceived to be in the position to mitigate potential health risks [13].

In the event of a crisis, governments are advised to engage in intensified communication [9, 10]. In order to build community trust and engagement, communication must be open and transparent, as well as scientifically based in order to facilitate the public's preparedness to deal with the health threat [9, 16, 34]. This call seems to be expressive of recent social developments towards a knowledge or information society [35]. Thereby, knowledge (re)production centers on documented scientific knowledge (e.g., scientific findings), which no longer solely has its origin in natural sciences but is also based on social sciences [29]. Moreover, this kind of knowledge is increasingly discussed in the media. While science communication is concerned with raising awareness for and creating familiarity with new aspects

<sup>1</sup> The arguments presented in this chapter build on a "Public Understanding of Science" and "Public Awareness of Science", both of which attest to the general public's attitudes, behaviors, or opinions towards science and scientific knowledge [24, 25].

of science (as part of a "Public Understanding of Science" and "Public Awareness of Science", [24, 25]), messages disseminated during any (health) crisis need to be designed strategically to present information in an appealing manner in order to draw respondents to (scientific) message content [21].
