1990
DOI: 10.1080/00335639009383932
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The role ofpathosin the decision‐making process: A study in the rhetoric of science policy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
0

Year Published

1995
1995
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Farrell and Goodnight (1981) explored the inadequacy of language used to respond to the partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear power-generating plant, and Luke (1987) examined the rhetorical strategies used by the media to portray the Chernobyl disaster. Waddell (1990) analyzed the role of pathos in a policy-making process surrounding potentially hazardous recombinant DNA experiments. Krendal, Olson, & Burke (1992) and Renz (1992) examined responses to health risks associated with incineration effects and recycling behavior.…”
Section: Tarla Rai Peterson Is An Associate Professor In the Departmementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Farrell and Goodnight (1981) explored the inadequacy of language used to respond to the partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear power-generating plant, and Luke (1987) examined the rhetorical strategies used by the media to portray the Chernobyl disaster. Waddell (1990) analyzed the role of pathos in a policy-making process surrounding potentially hazardous recombinant DNA experiments. Krendal, Olson, & Burke (1992) and Renz (1992) examined responses to health risks associated with incineration effects and recycling behavior.…”
Section: Tarla Rai Peterson Is An Associate Professor In the Departmementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This essay broadens such research by suggesting that the rhetorical gesture of including a fictional narrative within a situated political and scientific discourse highlights new possibilities for broader public discourses on science. This piece echoes the call of other scholars to consider other, nonrationalbased, modes of persuasion in public discussions of science (Locke, 2001;Waddell, 1990). The use of a film as a common idiom for scientists and nonscientists to converse about the ethical dimensions of genetic science where explicit knowledge of the science is not necessary for public deliberation is particularly relevant in the effort to translate scientific discourses to nonscientific publics without reasserting the hegemony of scientific terminisitic screens.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…3 By shaping our understanding of events, communication influences our emotional reactions to them; by shaping how we see life generally, it influences our habitual emotional responses. Moreover, private and public discourse supply standards for judging which feelings are valuable and when emotional reactions are appropriate (Waddell, 1990). Such judgments play an important role in the education of feelings, because they motivate efforts to cultivate some feelings and avoid others, both in particular situations and as a way of life (Harre, 1986;Heelas, 1986).…”
Section: Communication Cognition and Emotionsmentioning
confidence: 98%