Separated by a common language: awareness of term usage differences between languages and disciplines in biopreparedness.

M Gunnar Andersson, Katharina Tomuzia, Charlotta Löfström, Bernd Appel, Luca Bano, Haralampos Keremidis, Rickard Knutsson, Mikael Leijon, Susanna Ekströmer Lövgren, Dario De Medici, Andrea Menrath, Bart J van Rotterdam, Henk J Wisselink, Gary C Barker
{"title":"Separated by a common language: awareness of term usage differences between languages and disciplines in biopreparedness.","authors":"M Gunnar Andersson, Katharina Tomuzia, Charlotta Löfström, Bernd Appel, Luca Bano, Haralampos Keremidis, Rickard Knutsson, Mikael Leijon, Susanna Ekströmer Lövgren, Dario De Medici, Andrea Menrath, Bart J van Rotterdam, Henk J Wisselink, Gary C Barker","doi":"10.1089/bsp.2012.0083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Preparedness for bioterrorism is based on communication between people in organizations who are educated and trained in several disciplines, including law enforcement, health, and science. Various backgrounds, cultures, and vocabularies generate difficulties in understanding and interpretating terms and concepts, which may impair communication. This is especially true in emergency situations, in which the need for clarity and consistency is vital. The EU project AniBioThreat initiated methods and made a rough estimate of the terms and concepts that are crucial for an incident, and a pilot database with key terms and definitions has been constructed. Analysis of collected terms and sources has shown that many of the participating organizations use various international standards in their area of expertise. The same term often represents different concepts in the standards from different sectors, or, alternatively, different terms were used to represent the same or similar concepts. The use of conflicting terminology can be problematic for decision makers and communicators in planning and prevention or when handling an incident. Since the CBRN area has roots in multiple disciplines, each with its own evolving terminology, it may not be realistic to achieve unequivocal communication through a standardized vocabulary and joint definitions for words from common language. We suggest that a communication strategy should include awareness of alternative definitions and ontologies and the ability to talk and write without relying on the implicit knowledge underlying specialized jargon. Consequently, cross-disciplinary communication skills should be part of training of personnel in the CBRN field. In addition, a searchable repository of terms and definitions from relevant organizations and authorities would be a valuable addition to existing glossaries for improving awareness concerning bioterrorism prevention planning. </p>","PeriodicalId":87059,"journal":{"name":"Biosecurity and bioterrorism : biodefense strategy, practice, and science","volume":"11 Suppl 1 ","pages":"S276-85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3752503/pdf/bsp.2012.0083.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biosecurity and bioterrorism : biodefense strategy, practice, and science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/bsp.2012.0083","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Preparedness for bioterrorism is based on communication between people in organizations who are educated and trained in several disciplines, including law enforcement, health, and science. Various backgrounds, cultures, and vocabularies generate difficulties in understanding and interpretating terms and concepts, which may impair communication. This is especially true in emergency situations, in which the need for clarity and consistency is vital. The EU project AniBioThreat initiated methods and made a rough estimate of the terms and concepts that are crucial for an incident, and a pilot database with key terms and definitions has been constructed. Analysis of collected terms and sources has shown that many of the participating organizations use various international standards in their area of expertise. The same term often represents different concepts in the standards from different sectors, or, alternatively, different terms were used to represent the same or similar concepts. The use of conflicting terminology can be problematic for decision makers and communicators in planning and prevention or when handling an incident. Since the CBRN area has roots in multiple disciplines, each with its own evolving terminology, it may not be realistic to achieve unequivocal communication through a standardized vocabulary and joint definitions for words from common language. We suggest that a communication strategy should include awareness of alternative definitions and ontologies and the ability to talk and write without relying on the implicit knowledge underlying specialized jargon. Consequently, cross-disciplinary communication skills should be part of training of personnel in the CBRN field. In addition, a searchable repository of terms and definitions from relevant organizations and authorities would be a valuable addition to existing glossaries for improving awareness concerning bioterrorism prevention planning.

用共同语言分隔:认识生物防备中不同语言和学科之间术语用法的差异。
防备生物恐怖主义的基础是各组织中受过执法、卫生和科学等多个学科教育和培训的人员之间的沟通。不同的背景、文化和词汇会给理解和解释术语和概念带来困难,从而影响沟通。这在紧急情况下尤其如此,因为在这种情况下,清晰度和一致性至关重要。欧盟的 AniBioThreat 项目启动了一些方法,对事件中至关重要的术语和概念进行了粗略估计,并建立了一个包含关键术语和定义的试验性数据库。对收集到的术语和来源进行的分析表明,许多参与组织在其专业领域使用各种国际标准。在不同部门的标准中,同一个术语往往代表不同的概念,或者使用不同的术语来代表相同或相似的概念。使用相互矛盾的术语可能会给决策者和沟通者在规划和预防或处理事故时造成问题。由于化学、生物、辐射和核领域植根于多个学科,每个学科都有自己不断演变的术语,因此通过标准化词汇和共同语言中的共同定义来实现明确的沟通可能并不现实。我们建议,交流战略应包括对其他定义和本体的认识,以及不依赖专业术语背后的隐含知识进行交谈和写作的能力。因此,跨学科交流技能应成为化学、生物、辐射和核领域人员培训的一部分。此外,可搜索的相关组织和当局的术语和定义库将是对现有词汇表的宝贵补充,以提高对生物恐怖主义预防规划的认识。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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