The discussion of the psychology of risk focuses on both the public and terrorism experts. The public must have preparation well in advance of any terror-related crisis. The public must be guided in effective decisionmaking and in how they fit into larger counterterrorism plans. Terrorism evokes a wide range of emotions that must be understood if the Nation's leaders are to aid and predict citizens' choices. Experts, on the other hand, must be careful not to magnify risks in order to motivate citizens. Except for extreme situations (e.g., rapid evacuations), experts must seek a partnership with the public in implementing a rational strategy for addressing terrorism risks and crises. Regarding risk analysis and communication, one way of disciplining expert judgement is to perform formal risk analyses. This means identifying valued outcomes, the processes affecting them, and the experts with the best understanding of each. A focus on the special challenges of terrorism typically involves projecting scenarios outside of what individuals and the Nation have experienced in the past, so as to prevent and/or be prepared to address unprecedented crises. This paper examines issues in bioterrorism as an example of how to respond to the distinctive character of terrorism. In summary, the paper advises that effective risk analysis and communication require quantitative estimates of risk and explicit representation of the processes that shape those risks. Producing them requires diverse expertise, as well as the integration of risk analysis and communication, such that people's problems are addressed and their trust is secured. 28 suggested resources