New research finds mental health training is critical for disaster communicators

When disasters strike, emergency management communicators are responsible for delivering clear, lifesaving information under chaotic, high-pressure conditions. These communicators are on the front lines alongside traditional first responders. They often face intense public scrutiny, criticism and even verbal or physical threats, all while trying to keep communities informed during rapidly evolving crises.

As disasters become more frequent and more destructive, the stress on these professionals is compounded. Yet, mental health support and training is often lacking. Our research explored this issue at the intersection of disaster communication and mental health. We tested a triad model for trauma-informed disaster communication:

Through four focus groups and 17 in-depth interviews with emergency management communicators, our findings revealed a troubling inconsistency. Some communicators had received no mental health training at all, while a few had extensive training and even became trainers themselves. Whether someone received mental health training often depended on leadership’s priorities or personal initiative rather than a standardized approach.

While some communicators had procedures for incorporating mental health messaging into disaster responses, it was often treated as an afterthought. Many communicators reported feeling uncomfortable sharing FEMA-produced mental health resources after disasters — not because the materials were ineffective, but because they lacked the training and confidence to use them properly.

We found that the root of the issue is structural, a key point in HRO, rather than individual. In the Incident Command System (ICS), the public information officer is part of the command staff with a direct line to the incident commander. In practice, however, many communicators reported being excluded from leadership discussions during disaster response. They were also frequently left out of post-incident debriefs and after-action reviews, removing opportunities for communicators to process traumatic events and contribute to organizational learning.

Without formal training in disaster mental health, such as PFA, they lacked tools to support their communities, their peers and themselves. Today’s emergency management professionals operate in an environment of increasing disaster frequency, heightened public hostility and widespread misinformation. Communicators carry the stress of crisis response while navigating public pressure.

The majority of those interviewed agreed on one point: communicators need mental health support and training to do their jobs effectively. Our research findings recommend standardizing mental health training for disaster communicators, integrating them fully into leadership structures and debriefings, emphasizing the psychological support strategies from PFA, and empowering them to confidently share mental health resources with the public.

Disaster communicators do not need to be trained mental health counselors, but an evidence-based awareness of mental health needs and the signs of emotional distress, for both themselves and their communities, provides an opportunity to improve their disaster communication outcomes and support resilient communities. Training also may reduce staff burnout and on-the-job emotional distress.

For more information about this study, email Horsley at horsley@apr.ua.edu. This project was supported by a 2024 Page/Johnson Legacy Scholar Grant from the Arthur W. Page Center.