Vague warnings issued by the federal government might give terrorists just what they want, a Kansas University psychology professor said.

“The payoff for terrorists is to scare as many people as you can in a broad area,” Eric Vernberg said. “We don’t want to add to that by issuing general warnings of threats.”

Vernberg has studied how people — especially children and families — respond to terrorism and disasters. He said he wouldn’t have expected the latest round of warnings to lead to much paranoia among Americans.

“The concern I’ve heard expressed is they’re not quite clear what people are supposed to do as a result of that,” he said. “If there’s not an immediate, imminent risk in the place where you are, you’re not likely to change your activities.”

Vernberg said many people feared flying after the World Trade Center attacks. The latest round of warnings, because they’re vague, could lead to apprehension in many areas because people don’t know what form attacks could take.

“That’s the danger with that type of (warning) statement,” he said. “It lends itself to people having a broad fear about what could happen. Most people have a pretty good imagination.”

Vernberg suggests reassuring children their chances of being hurt are slim in a country of 250 million people.

He also said federal officials have done Americans a favor by suggesting they have radios, water and flashlights , among other items, in their homes. Studies in Israel have shown that children cope with threats best when they know their parents have a plan to deal with an emergency.

But focusing too much on the plan could lead to unnecessary stress for children, he said.

“If you go out and buy gas masks, and every day you huddle in your basement to practice an attack, it probably makes you more paranoid than prepared,” he said.