In this paper, we will explore the psychological impacts of two human-made disasters. One that happened during the First World War, and the other one is a recent terrorist attack in Paris, in 2015. The Lusitania Disaster was an attack from the German army to a British ship liner coming from New York to Liverpool, UK. The terrorist attack in Paris however was not a war attack, so people were not expecting anything as such. However, it can be argued that we are on a war today, that begun by several attacks of radical Islamic groups against the West. What we are exploring and evaluating in this paper is the public reactions to different massive disasters, and the psychological consequences of the disasters. We will critically evaluate the psychological impacts according to three major concepts of psychological disasters: Post-Traumatic Stress disorder, Terror Management Theory, and the different Phases in recovery from major disasters.
R.M.S. Lusitania Disaster
The Lusitania was a liner ship, the most powerful built at that the beginning of the 20th Century. It was a British ship that was sunk by the Germans during the WW1. The Germans threatened with bombing the ship if they entered the war zone area. The public was aware of the risk, but no one believed the Germans would attack a ship carrying so many citizens. Therefore, the ship departed disregarding the threats, from New York towards Liverpool, UK. After it was sunk, and the Germans were accused of breaking international war agreements for attacking civilians, the Germans excused themselves saying that Lusitania was carrying heavy ammunitions for the British to use in the war. 1198 civilians died, including men, women and children, many from the United States. Up to that time, the US remained neutral during the war for two years. But after that disaster the public strongly reacted against the Germans. Newspapers such as the New York Times had for a week, headlines showing the victims of the Lusitania, portraying the Germans as evil for breaking international war treatises, inciting in the public emotions such as anger and sorrow. Because many of the images showed people rescuing the victims, these images also inspired in the public reactions of heroism and consolation. We must mention that prior the disaster, most headlines showed images of the frontline battlefield. Thus, after the disaster, there was a mixed of emotions, those of anger and seeing Germans as evil, while pain, sorrow, and the desire to act with heroism. A week after the disaster the new headlines showed the US army fighting in the war (Library of Congress).
The way the public reacted to the disaster is also expressed by the way President Wilson reacted. The US was neutral in the war, as we have already mentioned, but the British propaganda contributed in influencing the Public opinion of the American people against the Germans. Altogether, the result was that the US entered the war shortly after the disaster. Some of the headlines called the German Kaiser ‘Lord of Torture’ and ‘Bloodshed’. Therefore, the American people began to do massive protests calling for actions, considering the German boats and submarines as pirates and murderers. The public demanded to enter the war against the Germans. The American’s reaction was so strong, that they even made the Germans react in such a way that lead them to lose the war. The Germans saw the way the American public reacted and the Kaiser gave the order from retrieving all the ships for the area, which was the mistake that made them lose the war (Duffy, 2009).
France suffered from a series of coordinated terrorist attacks on Friday 13th of November, 2015. Several suicide bombers and shooters bombed and shot civilians in public places around the city including restaurants and theatres. The attacks were in Paris and its suburbs. They were six or seven attacks that happened simultaneously killing 129 people, and injuring more than 350. One of the bombings was at the national football stadium, another at a restaurant on Boulevard Voltaire, and another in a Concert Hall. The ISIS terrorist group claimed responsibility for the attack through a message on several social media channels in Arabic, English and French languages, and threatening with further attacks. As soon as the attack happened, all around Europe the security measures were strengthened (Daniel, 2015).
The attacks continued with a series of videos and images uploaded in several social media channels by the terrorists, that began a network campaign with the intention of creating fear and terror among the public. While the Islamic terrorist group intended to spread terror and fear, they also wanted to recruit the Muslim population to their cause, which is against the Western Culture. They sent many messages that because they were done through social media were openly available to the public, included threats against Western countries, particularly to Rome. They said this city will be the next target, as well as London, Berlin, and even Moscow (Daniel, 2015). The amount of material that was published and that went viral on social networks is too much to mention here.
There were different emotional reactions caused by this disaster. To begin with, all the world authorities became united to show sympathy to the victims and to the French people. At the beginning of the same year there was a march on the streets of Paris, lead by World Authorities walking arm in arm, including religious leaders due to the 2014 Paris attack, also done by the same terrorist group (Melander, et.al, 2015).
Religion leaders including Jewish, Muslim as well as their respective communities were united by the barbaric even, highlighting that they should be distanced from religion. Due to the concern about future attacks, there was a growing sense of insecurity and fear among the public. Schools and other organizations began to practice evacuation drills, and the British Chief Rabbi was on TV saying how concern he was about his community attending the synagogue, highlighting and causing more fear among the public. Many EU states reacted in similar ways, drills, school classes were cancelled, and particularly Jewish schools were protected by military staff. Muslims also had similar effects as synagogues received police protection in many States of the EU. Furthermore, in France, the public reported Islamophobia incidents up to 110% increase between 2014 and 2015 (FRA, 2015).
But that was not only in France, in other states of the EU there was an increase of reported Islamophobia incidents such as verbal aggressions in the streets, or drivers not allowing Muslims on their buses, as well as threatening letters to mosques. In the United Kingdom, there a 'Christian Patrol' group was created called Britain First that patrolled in Muslim areas. There were many other cases of Islamophobia, but again, there are too many to describe here. Overall, we can say that the attacks and the viral messages on social media that the terrorist posted created such fear and insecurity that while the authorities reacted at a political and military level, the public responded by rejecting, threatening and getting ready to fight, against Muslims. The level of Islamophobia increased radically (FRA, 2015)
The public’s emotional reactions, particularly due to insecurity, lack of safety, constant threats, fear, etc., cause by both the attacks and the information spread across social media and all the other mainstream media, caused the European nations to take security measures and increase the level of alert. Furthermore, France imposed a new law of withdrawing French citizenship from French born terrorists. Together with the severe emotional reactions of the public already mentioned, there were other sympathetic reactions across France and Worldwide (CNN Library, 2016).
The public reacted fast in helping the victims. As there was not public transport, taxi drivers offered free rides to those needing to get home. Parisians opened their homes to those who needed a refuge due to the disaster. People hurried to leave flowers and pray for the victims, many minutes of silence were offered to remember those in the attack, and several monuments were lit in honor of the victims. Furthermore, many celebrities showed homage in their own way. But the most spread expression of support was the viral reaction on social media, of people changing their profile pictures of the French flag background to show solidarity with the French people who suffered from that barbaric attack. The whole world was moved by the attack. This was in response of the request to French people of lifting their three-color flags. (Horton et.al, 205). Everyone was very moved, all the media channels, both mainstream and online showed their sympathy with what happened. While there was an emotional turmoil, it was the confirmation of their lack of safety as it was too recent to the previous attack the French people suffered. However, the threat was to all the Western society, and this threat continues until today. There is a constant awareness across the world, that in any time there could be an attack. People are particularly emotionally sensitive when going to public places or places. If we had to summarize the emotional responses of the public are solidarity, horror, uncertainty and fear. All these leads to an increase in discrimination towards the Muslim community. The concrete reactions can be seen in the Brexit votes and in the Trump election. They are both two ways of taking radical decisions against immigration and terrorism, which come hand by hand.
Disaster Similarities and Dissimilarities
When looking at the psychological impact each disaster had, we can identify as the main similarity to be the reaction of the people to act, to take measures against the group or nation that caused the disaster. Both reactions are caused by the horror they felt, and how the attacker is considered evil and a threat. In the first disaster, people went out on the streets to complain and demand action, demand to enter the war. In the more recent disaster, people showed sympathy with the victims, but demanded action through their votes. There was an increase of islamophobia in France, but in other countries such as in the US and in the UK, they voted against immigration and in favour of strict anti-terrorist measures. The other psychological similarity is the fact that in the first disaster the US joined the Allies in fighting against Germany. The propaganda influenced the Public so they demanded action. What Britain wanted was for the US to join them in the cause against ‘evil Germany’. Similarly, after the Paris Attack, the media also contributed to a similar psychological reaction. This time it was all the world through social media, and mainstream media, to join against the Terrorists, represented by Muslims. Because all the world is under threat, media contributed both to emerge reactions against Terrorist and thus, Muslims, and to become one fighting against them. However, there is a difference here between the two disasters. Germany seeing the reaction of the people to their attack, decided to retract their ships, they also reacted to how the US public reacted. However, in the most recent event, Terrorists were the cause of the propaganda to infuse fear, insecurity, horror and anger among the people.
Finally, there is another difference between the two. The German attack happened in the middle of the sea, causing of course psychological effects on the people and more directly on the victims. However, the terrorist attack in Paris happened inland, in the middle of where people live. It was in the heart of Europe. They managed to surpass all the security measures and so it caused more severe emotional damage. It was a more intimate attack, closer to them. Furthermore, it was the second attack in the same city by the same group. It was a physical attack but also a psychological one. Terrorist showed they could do an attack if they wanted, and the message is now across the world. They are all worried and concerned, people are constantly preoccupied when and where another attack can happen.
Application of Major Psychology of Disaster Concepts
The three most important theories within the psychology of disaster management are the Post Traumatic Stress Management, The Terror Management Theory and finally the Phases of Recovery from Disaster's Theory. All disasters can potentially have psychological effects on people.
PTSD develops from having been exposed to a traumatic experience or stressor. After Mass Violence including Terrorist attacks, there are emotional effects due to traumatic stress. Some of these effects are Shock, terror, anger, grief, helplessness, etc. There are other positive outcomes of disasters such as resilience, helping other people, relief, and maturation (U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 2016). If the negative symptoms last for a long time, or if the victims are exposed to the stress, vulnerable or threatening situation continually, the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder can become more severe and even chronic (Olaya, et.al, 2015). Traumas can come back if memories are revived for example, not necessarily if the stressor is constant. According to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2016), the percentages of people who develop PTSD after a bombing disaster is 34% while a Mass shooting is of 28%. Most people experience fear, and other emotions such as the ones already mentioned. However most of the survivors of traumatic events, recover after several weeks. The recovery depends on many factors, for example, whether they are exposed to the stressor or not after the disaster. Other factors include the support they are given while recovering, the difficulties they encountered in the disaster scene, lack of information about what happened and why did it happened, etc. There are other positive factors that can help reduce the negative effects, such as the social support they received, education and income level, previous experiences of disasters and how they managed to cope with them, caring services offered to them, and information available regarding emergency and action to follow. Basically, most of the factors that affect the negative or positive outcome is linked to community support agencies and mediators who can act as alleviators of distress immediately after the disaster and in the long term.
The Terror Management theory proposes that people are aware of death, and in order to manage or control that fear, and be able to function normally in every day activities, people develop self defence tools to block the constant message about death. These self defence tools are developed through past and future cultural world views. In other words, through the constructions of beliefs that are shared by most people, giving meaning and values to those realities, and in that way reducing the terror that the knowledge of death causes (Pyszczynski, 2015).
Finally, the third major psychology disaster theory is about the steps or phases required to recover from a disaster. It is about being prepared for potential disasters, and minimizing negative effects by having already identifies the potential phases of the recovery process.
Having a good disaster recovery framework must be a priority for every nation. According to the United Nations (2015) 'Guide to Developing Disaster Recovery Frameworks. Disaster Recovery Framework', the phases of recovery should include a reference guide of the needs by sector, teams to be deployed, necessary data, reports, etc. After that, the recovery plan should have a schedule and a timeframe. The government involvement and participation should also be exposed, as well as other groups and movements. In the Paris scenario, all the religious groups were united to help each other. The whole world showed their support, some through donations some simply with moral support as seen with the example of the social media flags. Teams should be divided by sectors and field visits must be done by the correspondent team. Each division team must also write a report to be reviewed and approved by the right agency. All the steps should be developed according to a core vision of recovery, and with the greatest transparency. There are many phases to consider within this theory. However, most of them apply more fully to natural disasters faced by developing countries with poor or no resources.
The victims of both disasters covered in this paper can suffer from PTSD. In both disasters, the victims suffered from a human-made attack, more specifically a bombing. According to Olaya, et.al, (2015) individuals who experienced man-men disasters fall into the category of more severe clinical impairments of PTSD, in contrast to natural disasters Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2016) claim that 34% of people who experienced a bomb attack can develop PTSD. Furthermore, in the Paris attack there were also shooting involved. As we mentioned already, some of the emotional effects of these type of disasters are fear, terror, sadness, anger, shock, and others. If we look at the reaction of the public, not only the victims, we can identify all those emotions in the way they reacted. We mentioned that the president of the US after the Lusitania disaster was in shock and secluded himself. People went out on the streets and showed their anger, as well as their concern and sadness for the victims. In the Paris attack, similar emotions are also identified. People also showed their support and sadness for the victims. We mentioned people opening their homes to offer shelter and taxi drivers offering free rides. However, we can identify terror. Most EU nations strengthened their security measures, they elevated the level of alarm, and through democracy they voted against a threat that caused terror, they voted Brexit, and they voted a President that promised to protect them. We are not saying that the public suffered from PTSD. What we are saying is that the symptoms to develop the disorders were present in both events and that victims can potentially develop the disorder, while also the public in general reacted according to some of its emotional effects.
Another important aspect to consider is that one of the factors that can affect the development of PTSD is the constant exposure to the threat, stressor, or trauma. In the case of the Paris attack, it was the second attack in a short time to the same people. They had a year earlier the 2014 Paris attack. That can be a stressor that can aggravate the potential development of PTSD, and it can also affect the way the public reacts to that stressor. Furthermore, the constant publication of social media threatening images and messages can also work as a negative factor.
Some of the positive factors that we mentioned such people helping others, solidarity, etc., have also been identified in both disasters. The public in America was edified by seeing the images in the Newspapers of heroes saving the victims, and the world joined in support of the French people by changing their profile image of their social media networks for the French flags. These are just examples, but there are many more.
The Terror Management Theory is important to help victims of disasters such as terrorist or war attacks. We can apply this theory to the Paris Attack and understand people’s behaviour. One of the areas that Terror Management Theory deals with, is with anxiety and the psychological mechanisms in which death is linked with behaviour (Pyszczynski, 2015). There are a few elements that need to be dealt by the Terror Management Theory that became a reality after the Paris Attack. First, the fact that the public experienced from that moment, that death can happen unexpectedly (Pyszczynski, 2015). This is exactly what this theory is all about. Developing mechanisms to protect people from the constant awareness of death that is a certainty, and that can happen at any time. What the terrorist attacks gave people, both the public and the victims, is exactly that message. That death can happen at any time. Furthermore, they realized they were not protected by their governments, and that those who attacked them can be any of the people they know, as Europe and America have a large Islamic population. How can we identify this theory in the Paris attack? The best example is the Islamophobia increase rate. That is a self-defence reaction to survive. Another example is BREXIT, the legislation France applied to withdraw the French citizenship to any French born terrorist, the election of Trump, etc. These are new cultural norms of self-defence and preservation that are in line with the Terror Management Theory. It is aggravated by the constant publication of terrorist’s threats and continual terrorist attacks around the World.
Finally, the third major concept of psychology of disaster is the Phase Management or Framework. This theory can apply better to countries who suffer from poverty or have less resources and who suffer from severe natural disasters. We cannot apply this theory to the case of the Lusitania, because the material damage has been caused to a ship, and so its minimal. People did not lose their homes, nor hospital or schools or major buildings were lost. However, we can say this does apply to the Paris Attack. There was a physical damage, so the Phases described above can be applied. Several teams needed to be in place, the first ones to be applied was the National Security Team together with the medical teams.
However, these phases should also include the community and social support networks We mentioned how some of the factors that can help alleviate the PTSD are the way that victims are treated during and after the disasters. The support they are given, information provided to them, etc. These phases should include all these areas so that at the right time and place, all the victims, including the public, can have access to the necessary support. Whether it is medical, psychological, physical such as shelter. From this perspective, this theory can also be applied to the Lusitania Disaster. The framework network of recovery should also include support immediately after and in the long term to recover from the stressing episode. In the Paris Attack Disaster, the scenario is more severe because terrorist attacks and threats are continual and so for the victims who are still facing or recovering from the disaster, they need further support to deal with the constant bombarding of information and memories what happened and what still happens today.
Lessons Learned
We learned that the media is a source of emotional and public manipulation. In both disasters, the media was used to cause reactions in the people and the governments. In the case of Lusitania, the Allies won the war. However today the world is still suffering from the consequences of the information spread through the media. Terrorists are also making use of that means of communication to spread terror and threats, while the mainstream media does its part in the way Islam is seen and how people react towards Muslims. Finally, we learned how important it is to have a recovery framework in place whether it is for a human-made disaster or a natural disaster. Having a recovery framework in place can prevent many negative effects. All the teams are important to prevent psychological health problems: from people onsite immediately after a disaster providing support to the victims, as well as ongoing support after the disaster.
References
CNN Library (2016, Nov. 30). 2015 Paris Terror Attacks Fast Facts. CNN. Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/08/europe/2015-paris-terror-attacks-fast-facts/
Daniel, L. (2015). The Paris Black Friday 13/11/2015 Attacks - What do we know? What should we do?. Institute for Counter-Terrorism. Retrieved from https://www.ict.org.il/UserFiles/ICT-The-Black-Friday-Paris-Attacks-Nov15.pdf
Duffy, M. (2009, August 22). British Law Courts Review of the Sinking of the Lusitania, 7 May 1915. First World War. Retrieved from: http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/lusitania_britishreview.htm
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). 2015. Reactions to the Paris attacks in the EU: fundamental rights considerations. Retrieved from http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2015-paper-01-2015-post-paris-attacks-fundamental-rights-considerations-0_en.pdf.
Horton, H., Wilkinson, M., Biddall, S. and Waters, L. (2015, November 15). Paris attacks: How the world is showing solidarity with France. The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11995266/Paris-shooting-how-events-unfolded-on-social-media.html
Library of Congress. Newspaper Pictorials: World War I Rotogravures, 1914 to 1919. Retrieved from https://www.loc.gov/collections/world-war-i-rotogravures/about-this-collection/.
Melander, I., de La Hamaide, S. and Ponthus, J. (2015, Jan 11). French, foreign leaders walk arm-in-arm as millions protest Paris attacks. Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-shooting-idUSKBN0KK05S20150111
Olaya, B., Alonso, J., Atwoli, L. Kessler, R.C., Vilagut, G. and Haro, J.M. (2015). Association between traumatic events and post-traumatic stress disorder: results from the ESEMeD-Spain study. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. Pages from 172-183.
Pyszczynski, T. (2015). Thirty Years of Terror Management Theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology.
United Nations (2015). Guide to Developing Disaster Recovery Frameworks. Disaster Recovery Framework.
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (2016). Effects of Traumatic Stress after Mass Violence, Terror, or Disaster. Retrieved from http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/trauma/disaster-terrorism/stress-mv-t-dhtml.asp
