Building on evidence from the field of risk perception and communication, two key roles of argumentation in crisis management are highlighted: (1) balancing trust construction and persuasive goals in crisis prevention and preparedness, and (2) ensuring time-efficient cross-examination of choice options in group decision making at a time of crisis. The implications for an information fusion approach to crisis management are discussed, suggesting a rich potential for future research.
From argumentative crisis to critical arguments: How to argue in the face of danger / Bonelli, Laura; Felletti, Silvia; Paglieri, Fabio. - STAMPA. - (2016), pp. 365-387. [10.1007/978-3-319-22527-2_17].
From argumentative crisis to critical arguments: How to argue in the face of danger
BONELLI, LAURA;FELLETTI, SILVIA;
2016
Abstract
Building on evidence from the field of risk perception and communication, two key roles of argumentation in crisis management are highlighted: (1) balancing trust construction and persuasive goals in crisis prevention and preparedness, and (2) ensuring time-efficient cross-examination of choice options in group decision making at a time of crisis. The implications for an information fusion approach to crisis management are discussed, suggesting a rich potential for future research.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Bonelli_Argumentative-Crisis_2016.pdf
solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione
236.92 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
236.92 kB | Adobe PDF | Contatta l'autore |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.