|This section needs additional citations for verification. (November 2013)|
The normalcy bias, or normality bias, refers to a mental state people enter when facing a disaster. It causes people to underestimate both the possibility of a disaster occurring and its possible effects. This often results in situations where people fail to adequately prepare for a disaster, and on a larger scale, the failure of governments to include the populace in its disaster preparations. The assumption that is made in the case of the normalcy bias is that since a disaster never has occurred then it never will occur. It also results in the inability of people to cope with a disaster once it occurs. People with a normalcy bias have difficulties reacting to something they have not experienced before. People also tend to interpret warnings in the most optimistic way possible, seizing on any ambiguities to infer a less serious situation.
During the September 11 attacks, many in the World Trade Center returned to their offices during the evacuation to turn off their computers and ultimately died when the towers collapsed. More than 70% of survivors checked with others before deciding to evacuate.
Continued growth of the National Debt in spite of credit downgrades, warnings made public by David M. Walker (U.S. Comptroller General) , and ongoing deficit spending.
The normalcy bias often results in unnecessary deaths in disaster situations. The lack of preparation for disasters often leads to inadequate shelter, supplies, and evacuation plans. Even when all these things are in place, individuals with a normalcy bias often refuse to leave their homes.
The normalcy bias also causes people to drastically underestimate the effects of the disaster. Therefore, they think that everything will be all right, while information from the radio, television, or neighbors gives them reason to believe there is a risk. The normalcy bias creates a cognitive dissonance that they then must work to eliminate. Some manage to eliminate it by refusing to believe new warnings coming in and refusing to evacuate (maintaining the normalcy bias), while others eliminate the dissonance by escaping the danger. The possibility that some may refuse to evacuate causes significant problems in disaster planning.
The normalcy bias may be caused in part by the way the brain processes new data. Research suggests that even when the brain is calm, it takes 8–10 seconds to process new information. Stress slows the process, and when the brain cannot find an acceptable response to a situation, it fixates on a single and sometimes default solution that may or may not be correct. An evolutionary reason for this response could be that paralysis gives an animal a better chance of surviving an attack; predators are less likely to eat prey that isn't struggling.
- preparation, including publicly acknowledging the possibility of disaster and forming contingency plans
- warning, including issuing clear, unambiguous, and frequent warnings and helping the public to understand and believe them
- impact, the stage at which the contingency plans take effect and emergency services, rescue teams, and disaster relief teams work in tandem
- aftermath, or reestablishing equilibrium after the fact by providing supplies and aid to those in need
- Doswell, Chuck (06 October 2008). "Thoughts about Tornadoes and Camping Safety after the Iowa Tragedy on June 11, 2008". Flame.org. Archived from the original on 07 March 2009. Retrieved 02 November 2013."
- Ripley, Amanda (25 April 2005). "How to Get Out Alive". TIME Magazine. Retrieved 11 November 2013.
- Oda, Katsuya. "Information Technology for Advancement of Evacuation". National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management. Retrieved 02 November 2013.
- Valentine, Pamela V.; Smith, Thomas Edward (Summer 2002). "Finding Something to Do: the Disaster Continuity Care Model". Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention (From the School of Social and Behavioral Science at the University of Alabama-Birmingham (Valentine) and the School of Social Work at Florida State University (Smith): Oxford University Press) 2 (2): 183–196. ISSN 1474-3329. Retrieved 02 November 2013.