Evidence maps : communicating risk assessments in societal controversies: the case of engineered nanoparticles
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd">
<record>
<leader>00000cab a2200000 4500</leader>
<controlfield tag="001">MAP20110074784</controlfield>
<controlfield tag="003">MAP</controlfield>
<controlfield tag="005">20120119152244.0</controlfield>
<controlfield tag="008">111229e20111101usa|||p |0|||b|eng d</controlfield>
<datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">MAP</subfield>
<subfield code="b">spa</subfield>
<subfield code="d">MAP</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">7</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
<subfield code="a">Evidence maps</subfield>
<subfield code="b">: communicating risk assessments in societal controversies: the case of engineered nanoparticles</subfield>
<subfield code="c">Peter Wiedemann...[et. al]</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">The transparent and fair characterization of scientific evidence for reporting the results of a hazard assessment is a demanding task. In this article, we present an approach for characterizing evidencethe evidence map approach. The theoretical starting point is to view evidence characterization as a form of argumentation. Thus, evidence maps are designed to depict the evidence base, the pro and con arguments, and the remaining uncertainties, which together lead experts to their conclusions when summarizing and evaluating the scientific evidence about a potential hazard. To illustrate its use, the evidence maps approach is applied to characterizing the health-relevant effects of engineered nanoparticles. Empirical data from an online survey suggests that the use of evidence maps improves the reporting of hazard assessments. Nonexperts prefer to receive the information included in an evidence map in order to come to an informed judgment. Furthermore, the benefits and limitations of evidence maps are discussed in the light of recent literature on risk communication. Finally, the article underlines the need for further research in order to increase quality of evidence reporting </subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="1">
<subfield code="0">MAPA20080588953</subfield>
<subfield code="a">Análisis de riesgos</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="1">
<subfield code="0">MAPA20100048245</subfield>
<subfield code="a">Nanopartículas</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="1">
<subfield code="0">MAPA20080547127</subfield>
<subfield code="a">Estudios</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="1">
<subfield code="0">MAPA20120004566</subfield>
<subfield code="a">Mapas de evidencia</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
<subfield code="w">MAP20077000345</subfield>
<subfield code="t">Risk analysis : an international journal</subfield>
<subfield code="d">McLean, Virginia : Society for Risk Analysis, 1987-2015</subfield>
<subfield code="x">0272-4332</subfield>
<subfield code="g">01/11/2011 Tomo 31 Número 11 - 2011 , p. 1770-1783</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="856" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="y">MÁS INFORMACIÓN</subfield>
<subfield code="u">mailto:centrodocumentacion@fundacionmapfre.org?subject=Consulta%20de%20una%20publicaci%C3%B3n%20&body=Necesito%20m%C3%A1s%20informaci%C3%B3n%20sobre%20este%20documento%3A%20%0A%0A%5Banote%20aqu%C3%AD%20el%20titulo%20completo%20del%20documento%20del%20que%20desea%20informaci%C3%B3n%20y%20nos%20pondremos%20en%20contacto%20con%20usted%5D%20%0A%0AGracias%20%0A</subfield>
</datafield>
</record>
</collection>