Social Support Functions During a Slowly-Evolving Environmental Disaster: The Case of Amphibole Asbestos Exposure in Libby, Montana

Our plain-English summary of Social Support Functions During a Slowly-Evolving Environmental Disaster: The Case of Amphibole Asbestos Exposure in Libby, Montana, by R.J. Cline, H. Orom, J.T. Child, et al (Health Communication, 2015).

The study

• Authors: R.J. Cline, H. Orom, J.T. Child, T. Hernandez, B. Black
• Journal: Health Communication
• Published: 2015;30(11):1135-48
• Cited by: 9 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

Previous research concluded that victims of rapid-onset natural disasters (e.g., hurricanes) receive and provide high levels of instrumental support. However, different kinds of disasters (natural or human caused [technological, environmental, intentional/terrorism], rapid or slow onset, short or long duration) may create different stressors and thus influence the types of social support most needed and provided. We explored social support functions during an ongoing "slowly-evolving environmental disaster" in Libby, Montana due to widespread exposure to amphibole asbestos. Analyses of focus groups and in-depth interviews focused on the relative salience of support functions (emotional, informational, instrumental, and spiritual) identified as needed or provided. Dominant themes emerged around each function. Results indicated that informational support is particularly salient in this type of disaster. Although not all community members had experienced the disaster's health consequences (asbestos-related disease [ARD]), all had been affected by the disaster and had informational needs. The nature of those informational needs (e.g., medical vs. financial) varied based on experience with ARD. Experience with ARD was associated with awareness of disaster-related emotional and instrumental support needed or provided. Results have implications for future research on slowly-evolving environmental disasters and institutional and community responses to them.

In plain English

This qualitative study examined how residents of Libby, Montana, talked about social support during what the authors call an ongoing "slowly-evolving environmental disaster," in which community-wide exposure to Libby amphibole asbestos from a vermiculite mine had occurred. Seventy-one long-term residents (at least five years) joined nine focus groups and five interviews. Of these, 31 had asbestos-related disease (ARD), 17 were undiagnosed family members of people with ARD, and 23 had neither a personal nor a family ARD diagnosis. Researchers coded transcripts, treating the amount of talk on a topic as a sign of its salience. In talk about the disaster, informational support was the type most discussed (52.33% of relevant thought units). Outside that context, practical (instrumental) support was most discussed (40.07%). Participants with ARD and family members often needed health information to cope with illness. The information needs of those with no personal or family diagnosis more often concerned economic impact. More ARD participants than this last group discussed emotional support. The authors concluded that informational support was particularly salient in this kind of disaster. They cautioned that their findings were qualitative, exploratory and based on volunteers.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Qualitative study using focus groups and in-depth interviews, with coded content analysis of transcripts (amount of talk used as a measure of salience)
• Who was studied: 71 residents of the Libby, Montana area who had lived there at least 5 years, in nine focus groups and five individual interviews: people with ARD (n = 31), undiagnosed family members of people with ARD (n = 17), and people not diagnosed with ARD and with no ARD diagnoses in family members (n = 23); study dates not given
• Exposure: Past community-wide exposure to Libby amphibole asbestos contaminating vermiculite from a local mine (operated by W.R. Grace from 1963 until its closing in 1990). The study itself compared participants by their experience with asbestos-related disease (ARD), not by measured exposure.
• Main results:
  • Of the 1,330 thought units that addressed specific support functions, 43.53% (n = 579) addressed informational support. The rest addressed emotional support (31.28%), instrumental support (19.85%) and spiritual support (5.34%).
  • Outside the disaster context, instrumental support was the most discussed function (40.07% of thought units).
  • In the asbestos disaster context, informational support dominated: more than half of thought units and 93% of participants addressed it, compared with 14% of thought units in the nondisaster context.
  • The proportion of speakers discussing informational support did not differ significantly by experience with ARD.
  • ARD and family participants often needed information about the disaster's health consequences to cope with their own or a family member's illness. The information needs of non-ARD participants (no personal or family ARD diagnosis) more often related to the disaster's economic impact.
  • More participants with ARD than non-ARD participants discussed emotional support (p = .021, Fisher's exact test).
  • Proportionately more ARD participants (p = .029) and family participants (p = .003) than non-ARD participants discussed instrumental support they themselves had provided.
  • Spiritual support was little discussed. Proportionately more non-ARD than family participants discussed it (p = .030).
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that the slowly-evolving environmental disaster showed distinct patterns of social support needs, with informational support particularly salient. They attributed this to the whole community being affected by the disaster in different ways.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • Findings are qualitative and exploratory, are based on volunteer participants, and may not generalize to all members of the Libby community.
  • More talk about informational needs may not reflect greater perceived or actual need; such talk may simply be more socially acceptable.
  • It is unknown whether providing more information would increase or decrease uncertainty.
  • Failures to meet support needs, within social networks or through institutions, were not analyzed in this article.

Mines named here

Asbestos mines this study is about. Each mine's page says who ran it, when it worked, and what it produced.

• Libby vermiculite mine, Montana

All asbestos mines

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Amphibole Asbestos.

Related studies

• Community-level social support responses in a slow-motion technological disaster: the case of Libby, Montana — R.J. Cline, H. Orom, et al. (2010)
• Determining satisfaction with access and financial aspects of care for persons exposed to Libby amphibole asbestos: rural and national environmental policy implications — C.A. Winters, W. Hill, et al. (2011)
• Principal components analysis to identify influences on research communication and engagement during an environmental disaster — C.A. Winters, C.F. Moore, et al. (2016)
• A review of scientific literature examining the mining history, geology, mineralogy, and amphibole asbestos health effects of the Rainy Creek igneous complex, Libby, Montana, USA — B.R. Bandli, M.E. Gunter (2006)
• Exposure to airborne amphibole structures and health risks: Libby, Montana — B. Price (2008)
• Lung cancer screening in patients with Libby amphibole disease: High yield despite predominantly environmental and household exposure — G. Loewen, B. Black, et al. (2019)

Browse return to medical research.