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
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 in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.