đź“Š Outrage Factors
Highly Influential Factors
Control: Me
Control: Others
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
When people feel they have control over a risk, outrage is lower. When control rests with others—especially distant authorities or corporations—outrage increases significantly.
Responsive
Unresponsive
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
When stakeholders feel heard and see their concerns addressed, outrage decreases. Unresponsiveness—ignoring concerns, dismissing questions, or hiding behind "no comment"—is explosive.
Trusted
Untrusted
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Trusted sources can say almost anything; untrusted sources cannot. Once trust is lost, technical arguments become counterproductive—the more you prove you're right, the more they distrust you.
Moderately Influential Factors
Chronic
Catastrophic
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Chronic risks (steady, ongoing) provoke less outrage than catastrophic risks (sudden, dramatic). A plane crash with 100 deaths outrages more than car accidents killing 100 over months.
Forgettable
Memorable
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Risks connected to memorable events (Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Love Canal) carry the weight of those memories. Symbols matter more than statistics.
Knowable
Unknowable
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Uncertain or unknowable risks are more frightening. When experts disagree or admit uncertainty, outrage increases—even though honesty is better than false certainty.
Morally Irrelevant
Morally Relevant
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
When a risk feels morally wrong (pollution = sin), cost-benefit analysis seems obscene. "How much cancer is acceptable?" is not a technical question.
Fair
Unfair
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
When those who bear the risks don't get the benefits (or vice versa), outrage increases. Environmental justice issues are fundamentally about fairness.
Base Factors
Familiar
Exotic
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Familiar risks feel safer even when they're not. We're used to car accidents but not nuclear radiation, even though the former kills far more people.
Natural
Industrial
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Natural risks (radon, lightning) feel more acceptable than human-made ones. Industrial risks carry blame; natural disasters don't.
Minor Factors
Not Dreaded
Dreaded
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Some risks evoke visceral dread (cancer, radiation) while others don't (heart disease). Dread amplifies outrage regardless of actual probability.
Voluntary
Coerced
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Risks we choose (skiing, smoking) are tolerated far more than risks imposed on us. Coerced risks feel like violations.
Additional Factors
General Population
Vulnerable Groups
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Risks affecting children, elderly, or other vulnerable populations trigger stronger protective outrage.
Immediate Effects
Delayed Effects
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Delayed effects (cancer appearing years later) create anxiety because you can't know if you're already harmed.
Current Generation
Future Generations
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Risks affecting future generations (genetic damage, climate change) carry intergenerational moral weight.
Statistical Victims
Identifiable Victims
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
A single identifiable victim ("Baby Jessica") generates more outrage than statistical deaths. Names and faces matter.
Risk Eliminated
Risk Reduced
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
Reducing risk is less satisfying than eliminating it. "We cut emissions 90%" still means 10% remains—and that's still wrong.
Clear Benefits
Unclear Benefits
Very ApatheticVery Outraged
When benefits are unclear or go to others, risk tolerance drops. "What's in it for me?" is a legitimate question.
📡 Amplifiers (Experimental)
⚠️ Experimental Feature
These amplifiers are being tested. They measure the "visibility" and "growth potential" of the controversy, not the underlying outrage factors.
2
Volume (Visibility)
0
Growth Potential
Group Segmentation
đź‘Ą Group Segmentation
Estimate what percentage of your audience falls into each category. Total must equal 100%.
Will follow trusted opinion leaders; focus on winning leaders
Entrenched position; unlikely to change regardless of evidence
Persuadable; open to dialogue and new information
Haven't engaged yet; need more information to categorize
Total: 100%
đź“Š Assessment Results
1 (Apathetic)
10 (Outraged)
Neutral
Moderate Factors
5
Highly Influential
5
Combined (Mod+High)
5
Not yet saved