Assist or accuse? Identifying trends in crisis communication through a bibliometric literature review

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Sanneke Kuipers, Sara Perlstein, Jeroen Wolbers, Wouter Jong
{"title":"Assist or accuse? Identifying trends in crisis communication through a bibliometric literature review","authors":"Sanneke Kuipers, Sara Perlstein, Jeroen Wolbers, Wouter Jong","doi":"10.1002/rhc3.12283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Communication has always been key to crisis management research, but even more so in recent years, from multiple disciplinary angles. In this bibliometric study and review of the literature, we aim to identify different clusters of crisis communication research in the literature and whether and how much these crisis communication research clusters overlap. With different fields taking an interest in crisis communication, we ask ourselves where the interests of these fields overlap, and to what extent the different communities are aware of each other's work. Apart from offering an overview of topical clusters in crisis communication research and connections between those clusters of studies on crisis communication, we identify and explain two main approaches to crisis communication: a political or accusatory approach, and a functional or assistory approach. We conclude in our study and discussion that these approaches may need to broaden their research horizons to ensure the applicability of crisis communication strategies beyond the countries, media platforms, and audience orientations that have predominantly shaped the existing research landscape.","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":"75 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12283","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Communication has always been key to crisis management research, but even more so in recent years, from multiple disciplinary angles. In this bibliometric study and review of the literature, we aim to identify different clusters of crisis communication research in the literature and whether and how much these crisis communication research clusters overlap. With different fields taking an interest in crisis communication, we ask ourselves where the interests of these fields overlap, and to what extent the different communities are aware of each other's work. Apart from offering an overview of topical clusters in crisis communication research and connections between those clusters of studies on crisis communication, we identify and explain two main approaches to crisis communication: a political or accusatory approach, and a functional or assistory approach. We conclude in our study and discussion that these approaches may need to broaden their research horizons to ensure the applicability of crisis communication strategies beyond the countries, media platforms, and audience orientations that have predominantly shaped the existing research landscape.
帮助还是指责?通过文献计量学文献综述确定危机沟通的趋势
沟通一直是危机管理研究的关键,但近年来更是如此,从多个学科的角度来看。在这项文献计量学研究和文献回顾中,我们旨在确定文献中危机传播研究的不同集群,以及这些危机传播研究集群是否重叠以及重叠的程度。不同的领域都对危机传播感兴趣,我们问自己这些领域的兴趣在哪里重叠,不同的社区对彼此的工作有多大程度的了解。除了概述危机传播研究中的主题集群以及这些危机传播研究集群之间的联系外,我们还确定并解释了危机传播的两种主要方法:政治或指责方法,以及功能或辅助方法。在我们的研究和讨论中,我们得出结论,这些方法可能需要拓宽他们的研究视野,以确保危机传播策略在国家、媒体平台和受众取向之外的适用性,这些国家、媒体平台和受众取向主导着现有的研究格局。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Scholarship on risk, hazards, and crises (emergencies, disasters, or public policy/organizational crises) has developed into mature and distinct fields of inquiry. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy (RHCPP) addresses the governance implications of the important questions raised for the respective fields. The relationships between risk, hazards, and crisis raise fundamental questions with broad social science and policy implications. During unstable situations of acute or chronic danger and substantial uncertainty (i.e. a crisis), important and deeply rooted societal institutions, norms, and values come into play. The purpose of RHCPP is to provide a forum for research and commentary that examines societies’ understanding of and measures to address risk,hazards, and crises, how public policies do and should address these concerns, and to what effect. The journal is explicitly designed to encourage a broad range of perspectives by integrating work from a variety of disciplines. The journal will look at social science theory and policy design across the spectrum of risks and crises — including natural and technological hazards, public health crises, terrorism, and societal and environmental disasters. Papers will analyze the ways societies deal with both unpredictable and predictable events as public policy questions, which include topics such as crisis governance, loss and liability, emergency response, agenda setting, and the social and cultural contexts in which hazards, risks and crises are perceived and defined. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy invites dialogue and is open to new approaches. We seek scholarly work that combines academic quality with practical relevance. We especially welcome authors writing on the governance of risk and crises to submit their manuscripts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信