Cognitive mapping tools : review and risk management needs

<?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">MAP20120044241</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="003">MAP</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="005">20121112162121.0</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="008">121022e20120806esp|||p      |0|||b|spa 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="0" ind2="0">
      <subfield code="a">Cognitive mapping tools</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">: review and risk management needs</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">Matthew D. Wood...[et.al]</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">Risk managers are increasingly interested in incorporating stakeholder beliefs and other human factors into the planning process. Effective risk assessment and management requires understanding perceptions and beliefs of involved stakeholders, and how these beliefs give rise to actions that influence risk management decisions. Formal analyses of risk manager and stakeholder cognitions represent an important first step. Techniques for diagramming stakeholder mental models provide one tool for risk managers to better understand stakeholder beliefs and perceptions concerning risk, and to leverage this new understanding in developing risk management strategies. This article reviews three methodologies for assessing and diagramming stakeholder mental models - decision-analysis-based mental modeling, concept mapping, and semantic web analysis - and assesses them with regard to their ability to address risk manager needs.</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080591182</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Gerencia de riesgos</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080566852</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Planificación</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">MAPA20080602574</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Métodos de evaluación</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080572730</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Mapa de riesgos</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080550127</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Cognición</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">06/08/2012 Volumen 32 Número 8  - agosto 2012 , p. 1333-1348</subfield>
    </datafield>
  </record>
</collection>