Emotional tone and argumentation in risk communication
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2008, Vol 3, Issue 1
Abstract
In this paper I explore how the evolution of emotional expression and co-operative planning in humans may inform the way they communicate about risks, and what implication this may have for models of rationality in risk communication. In particular, I focus on aspects of human language that enable successful co-ordination around shared tasks that involve the management of uncertainty by a group. I distinguish between performative (action-oriented) and constative (description-oriented) aspects of human communication, and argue that the human logical vocabulary of conditionals, quantifiers and probability expressions often conveys pragmatic signals that implicitly encourage or discourage a course of action that is under discussion. I review some studies that illustrate this perspective by highlighting the role of emotional undertone in risk communication and management, and show how it differs from existing models of risk communication and decision-making.
Authors and Affiliations
Denis Hilton
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677607
- DOI -
- Views 149
- Downloads 0
A novel approach to studying strategic decisions with eye-tracking and machine learning
We propose a novel method of using eye-tracking to study strategic decisions. The conventional approach is to hypothesize what eye-patterns should be observed if a given model of decision-making was accurate, and then pr...
Choosing victims: Human fungibility in moral decision-making
In considering moral dilemmas, people often judge the acceptability of exchanging individuals’ interests, rights, and even lives. Here we investigate the related, but often overlooked, question of how people decide who t...
Exploiting moral wiggle room: Illusory preference for fairness? A comment
We designed an experiment to test the robustness of Dana, Weber, and Kuang’s (DWK), 2007 results. DWK observed that, when participants were given a “costless” way — the click of a button — to ignore the consequences of t...
Downside financial risk is misunderstood
The mathematics of downside financial risk can be difficult to understand: For example a 50% loss requires a subsequent 100% gain to break-even. A given percentage loss always requires a greater percentage gain to break-...
Validation and invariance across age and gender for the Melbourne Decision-Making Questionnaire in a sample of Portuguese adults
The personal pattern of coping with the stress associated with making decisions characterizes the way an individual makes choices and judgments. The Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ) analyses these personal...