The aftermath of September 11, 2001 left our country fighting a battle against terrorism. While our government has taken steps in protecting our country with the formation of the Department of Homeland Security, researchers in the field of Sports Management have begun to examine security preparation and risk management plans at sporting events. However, little research has examined risk assessment and risk communication. Securing sport venues starts with an individual analyzing all the potential risks with hosting an event. How risk is communicated and how risk is perceived can affect security preparation and risk management plans. The purpose of this study was (1) To discover whether information presented on a frequency or probability scale affects a basketball facility managers perception of the likelihood of a possible terrorist attack. (2) To detect whether information presented on a frequency or probability scale affects a basketball facility manager\u27s security preparation. (3) To identify if the media\u27s (television, radio, internet, conferences, magazine, newspaper, and word of mouth) portrayal of terrorism influences a facility manager\u27s perception that an attack is likely to occur. Three hundred and fifty facility managers at NCAA Division I universities and colleges in the United States, who were in charge of basketball arena safety, were chosen as subjects for this study. Questions pertaining to risk communications were presented on frequency and probability scales to see if managers\u27 perceptions of risk differed. The research also studied whether or not mass media influenced managers\u27 perceptions of the likelihood of a terrorist attack and security preparation plans. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). When a\xa0significant difference was found for a research question whose independent variable had three or more groups, post hoc analysis using the Tukey Honesty Significant Difference (HSD) was performed \xa0to determine a mean difference between groups. The results indicated that there was a difference in how facility managers interpreted risk when information was provided on two different scales, i.e., frequency versus probability.\xa0When facility managers were placed in New York, they perceived greater risk to their facility when risk was presented on a frequency scale versus a probability scale. Furthermore, facility managers were more likely to monitor Homeland Security when risk is presented on a frequency scale than on a probability scale, when placed at a facility in New York. Additionally, when determining at what point, i.e., threshold, facility managers would re-evaluate their security preparation plans, facility managers\xa0 indicated\xa0 re-evaluating security plans sooner when risk was communicated on a frequency scale as opposed to a probability scale.\u2
