Practice Feedback Mechanism - 2.2 | 8. Source, Message and Receiver in Disaster Risk Communication | Disaster Preparedness & Planning - Vol 7
K12 Students

Academics

AI-Powered learning for Grades 8–12, aligned with major Indian and international curricula.

Professionals

Professional Courses

Industry-relevant training in Business, Technology, and Design to help professionals and graduates upskill for real-world careers.

Games

Interactive Games

Fun, engaging games to boost memory, math fluency, typing speed, and English skills—perfect for learners of all ages.

Practice Questions

Test your understanding with targeted questions related to the topic.

Question 1

Easy

What are the two main roles in risk communication?

💡 Hint: Remember the acronym S-R.

Question 2

Easy

What does 'noise' refer to in communication?

💡 Hint: Think about distractions in your life.

Practice 4 more questions and get performance evaluation

Interactive Quizzes

Engage in quick quizzes to reinforce what you've learned and check your comprehension.

Question 1

What is the term for the entity that relays information from sender to receiver?

  • Sender
  • Transmitter
  • Receiver

💡 Hint: Think about communication channels, like TV or radio.

Question 2

True or False: Feedback is unnecessary in the communication process.

  • True
  • False

💡 Hint: Consider its role in clarifying misunderstandings.

Solve and get performance evaluation

Challenge Problems

Push your limits with challenges.

Question 1

Analyze a recent disaster communication case. Identify the roles of sender, transmitter, and receiver, and evaluate the effectiveness based on feedback received.

💡 Hint: Look into news articles or reports on disaster management responses.

Question 2

Design a communication plan for a community at risk of flooding. Identify the senders, transmitters, and potential noise factors, and how feedback will be integrated.

💡 Hint: Consider using local media channels and community meetings to gather responses.

Challenge and get performance evaluation