Marketing Gas Leak Reporting and Safety With the Extended Parallel Processing Model

Background Natural gas leaks cause destruction, injuries, and deaths in major urban areas, especially impacting low-income neighborhoods and communities of color. Focus of the Article Drawing from the extended parallel processing model (EPPM), this study explores people’s perceptual barriers to reporting gas leaks and promoting gas safety practices in general, focusing the threat and efficacy mechanisms leading to gas leak reporting behavior. Research Questions To discover the perceived threats to self and response efficacy, we explore how much knowledge people have about gas leaks, what barriers get in the way of gas leak reporting, and what could motivate people to report a suspected gas leak. Importance to the Social Marketing Field This study shows how toggling between social marketing concepts and the EPPM can expand understandings of threat to incorporate emotions that interfere with “fear,” lays the groundwork for multiple stimulus and response factors to address audience barriers, and retains but widens the EPPM’s scope beyond messaging to provoke sufficient levels of perceived threat and efficacy toward behavior change. Methods We conducted 56 intercept interviews throughout New York City and a U.S.-based online survey of 608 adults who reported using gas in their home. Results We find: 1) three key perceptual barriers for gas leak reporting, involving participants’ fear and confusion with gas leak causes and signs, thresholds of concern about the threats gas leaks pose, and degrees of efficacy in these situations; 2) a large proportion of people either do not know the signs of or what to do about gas leaks; 3) a lack of uniform marketing about gas leaks likely thwarts people from reporting; 4) many perceptual barriers to reporting exist, such as individuals not wanting to raise a false alarm; 5) the top motivators for reporting include the threats of an explosion and the health effects of gas leaks for oneself and loved ones; 6) to build efficacy, people most commonly identify gas leaks by smell, sound, and sight, in that prioritized order. Recommendations for Research or Practice We advise gas utility stakeholders to address the multisensory nature of gas leaks, focusing on the threat-inducing security and health losses at stake, using 4P strategies (place, price, product, and promotion; including midstream interventions by landlords and others), and centering future marketing on people leaving their homes and calling 911 to promote efficacy, even if they are unsure of a gas leak. Limitations The use of New York City and U.S. non-probability samples limits the generalizability of our study. Among other considerations, future research could explore psychographics, cultural differences, or technological affordances on gas leak reporting.