Emotional tone and argumentation in risk communication

Judgment and Decision Making

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 100-110

  Hilton, Denis ^a  

^a UTM   (France)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Communication; Emotion; Pragmatics; Risk

Indexed keywords

EID: 70349931321     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19302975     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
2. Bless, H., Betsch, T. & Franzen, A. (1998). Framing of the framing effect: The impact of context cues on solutions to the "Asian Disease" problem. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 297-1291
3. Blair, R. J. R. (2003). Facial expressions, their communicatory functions and neuro-cognitive substrates. In C. Frith & D. Wolpert (Eds.). The neuroscience of social interaction: Decoding, imitating, and influencing the actions of others (pp. 241-264). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Darwin, C. (1879/2004). The expression of emotion in man and animals. London: Penguin Books.
5. Edwards, W., Lindman, H. & Savage, L. J. (1963). Bayesian statistics forpsychological research. Psychological Review, 70, 193-242.
6. Evans, J. St. B. & Over, D. E. (2004). If. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Fox, J. (1980). Formal and knowledge-based methods in decision technology. Acta Psychologica, 56, 303-331
8. Gärdenfors, P. (2004). Co-operation and the evolution of symbolic communication. In K. Oller & U. Griebel (Eds.). The evolution ofcommunication systems (pp. 237-256).
9. Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M. & the ABC Research Group. Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Giner-Sorolla, R., E. Castano, P. Espinosa & R. Brown (in press). Shame expressions reduce the recipient's insult from outgroup reparations. Journal ofExperi- mental Social Psychology
11. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (Eds.). Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Wiley.
12. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
13. Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55, 1217-1230.
14. Hilton, D. J. (1995). The social context of reasoning: Conversational inference and rational judgment. Psy chological Bulletin, 118, 248-271.
15. Hilton, D. J., Kemmelmeier, M., & Bonnefon, J. F. (2005). Putting ifs to work: Goal-based relevance in conditional directives. Journal ofExperimental Psychology: General, 134, 388-1105
16. Hilton, D. J. & Slugoski, B. R. (2000). Discourse processes and rational inference: Judgment and decision- making in a social context. In T. Connolly, H. Arkes and K. Hammond (Ed.). Judgment and decision- making: A reader (2nd Edition) (pp. 651-679). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Hilton, D. J., Villejoubert, G. & Bonnefon, J-F. (2005).How to do things with logical expressions: Creating collective value through co-ordinated reasoning. Interaction Studies, 6(1), 103-117.
18. Horn, L. (1989). A natural history of negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19. Juanchich, M. (2006). Force illocutoire des condition- nels indicatifs: "Quand l'expression de l'incertitude confère une fonction performative à un conditionnel conseil." Mémoire Mastère Recherche, University of Toulouse-II.
20. Kahneman, D. & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin & D. Kahneman (Eds.). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgement (pp. 49-81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
22. Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution in social psychology. In Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 15, 192-238.
23. Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory ofgeneralized conversational implicature. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
25. Lichtenstein, S., & Newman, J. R. (1967). Empirical scaling of common verbal phrases associated with numerical probabilities. Psychonomic Science, 9, 563-564.
26. Luria, A. R. (1959). The directive function of speech in development and dissolution, Part I. Word, 15, 341-352.
27. McKenzie, C. R. M. (2004). Framing effects in inference tasks - and why they're normatively defensible. Memory & Cognition, 32, 874-885.
28. McKenzie, C. R. M, Liersch, M. J. & Finkelstein, S. (2006). Recommendations in policy defaults. Psychological Science, 17, 414-420
29. Moxey, L. M., & Sanford, A. J. (1993a). Communicating quantities: A psychological perspective. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
30. Moxey, L. M., & Sanford, A. J. (1993b). Prior expectation and the interpretation of natural language quantifiers. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 5, 73-91.
31. Moxey, L. M., & Sanford, A. J. (2000). Communicating quantities: a review of psycholinguistic evidence of how expressions determine perspectives. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, 237-255.
32. Oaksford, M., & Chater, N. (1994). A rational analysis of the selection task as optimal data selection. Psychological Review, 101, 608-631.
33. Over, D. E., Manktelow, K. I., & Hadjichristidis, C. (2004). Conditions for the acceptance of deontic conditionals. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 96-105.
34. Pepper, S. and Prytulak, L. S. (1974). Sometimes frequently means seldom: Context effects in the interpretations of quantitative expressions. Journal of Re- search in Personality, 8, 95-101.
35. Premack, D. (1976). Intelligence in ape and man. Hills-dale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36. Savage-Rumbaugh, S., Shanker, S. G. & Taylor, T. J. (1998). Apes, language & the human mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Shafir, E., Simonson, I., & Tversky, A. (1993). Reason-based choice. Cognition, 49, 11-36.
38. Sher, S. &McKenzie, C. R. M. (2006). Information leakage from logically equivalent frames. Cognition, 101, 467-494.
39. Sloman, S. A. (2002). Two systems of reasoning. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin & D. Kahneman (Eds.) Heuristics and biases: The psychology ofintuitive judgment (pp. 379-396). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. Sperber, D. (2001). An evolutionary perspective on testimony and argumentation. Philosophical Topics, 29, 401-413.
41. Stevens, J. R. & Stephens, D. W. (2004). The economic basis of co-operation: Tradeoffs between selfishness & generosity. Behavioral Ecology, 15(2), 255-261.
42. Strawson, P. F. (1964). Intention and convention in speech acts. Philosophical Review, 73, 439-460
43. Teigen, K. H., & Brun, W. (1995). Yes, but it is uncertain: Direction and communicative intention of verbal probabilistic terms. Acta Psychologica, 88, 233-258.
44. Teigen, K. H., & Brun, W. (1999). The directionality of verbal probability expressions: effects on decisions, predictions, and probabilistic reasoning. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 80, 155-190.
45. Teigen, K. H., & Brun, W. (2000). Ambiguous probabilities: when does p = 0.3 reflect a possibility, and when does it express a doubt? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 345-362.
46. Teigen, K. H., & Brun, W. (2003). Verbal probabilities: A question of frame? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 53-72.
47. Van Buiten, M. & Keren, G. (2006). Speaker-listener incompatibility: Joint and separate processing in risky choice framing. Unpublished paper.
48. Villejoubert, G. & Hilton, D. (2007). The Pragmatic Function of Verbal Quantifiers and Probability Phrases. Unpublished manuscript.
49. Wallsten, T. S., Budescu, D. V., Rapoport, A., Zwick, R., & Forsyth, B. (1986). Measuring the vague meaning of probability terms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 115, 348-365.
50. Wallsten, T. S., Fillenbaum, S., & Cox, J. A. (1986).Base rate effects on the interpretation of probability and frequency expressions. Journal ofMemory and Language, 25, 571-587.
51. Wason, P. C. & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1972). Psychology of reasoning: Structure and content. London: Batsford.
52. Zuberbühler, K. (2000a). Causal cognition in a non- human primate: Field playback experiments with Diana monkeys. Cognition, 76, 195-207.
53. Zuberbuhler, K. (2000b). Causal knowledge of wild predators' behavior in Diana monkeys. Animal Behaviour, 59, 209-220.