Better Access to Terminology for Crisis Communications

Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 501)

Abstract

Crisis management depends on efficient communications with professional staff and with people who are affected by the crisis. The correct interpretation of general language and technical terms is crucial to take good actions and to save valuable time. To reduce the risk of misunderstandings we need a well-established crisis management terminology. Several collections of terms have been prepared for hazard areas such as pollution, radiation, fire safety, and dangerous goods. Today such terminologies can be provided on different websites, depending on how the national crisis management is organised. This distribution and a variation of different formats and user interfaces can make them hard to use. In this paper, we propose a novel approach to enable the term definition retrieval from a selection of terminologies directly from the text where the term is used. Initial experiments show that this approach can save time both for the retrieval and for the maintenance of terminologies. People involved in training and planning can benefit from access to definitions directly from the text of online documents. Terminology maintainers can benefit from the automated generation of internal links in the terminology so that the terms used in the definition of the other terms are automatically linked.

Keywords

Terminology ICT - supported crisis communication Crisis glossary 

References

  1. 1.
    Iluzia Iacob, A., et al.: Strategy map for the crisis communication. Procedia Econ. Financ. 23, 1119–1124 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coombs, W.T.: The value of communication during a crisis: insights from strategic communication research. Bus. Horiz. 58(2), 141–148 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Drake, J.L., et al.: Communicating Climate-Change and Natural Hazard Risk and Cultivating Resilience. Springer, Heidelberg (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Edworthy, J., et al.: Passing crisis and emergency risk communications: the effects of communication channel, information type, and repetition. Appl. Ergon. 48, 252–262 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hagelsteen, M., Becker, P.: A great babylonian confusion: terminological ambiguity in capacity development for disaster risk reduction in the international community. In: 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference (IDRC), Global Risk Forum (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Johansen, W., Aggerholm, H.K., Frandsen, F.: Entering new territory: a study of internal crisis management and crisis communication in organisations. Public Relat. Rev. 38(2), 270–279 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ki, E.-J., Nekmat, E.: Situational crisis communication and interactivity: usage and effectiveness of Facebook for crisis management by fortune 500 companies. Comput. Hum. Behav. 35, 140–147 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu, B.F., Fraustino, J.D.: Beyond image repair: suggestions for crisis communication theory development. Public Relat. Rev. 40(3), 543–546 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Thywissen, K.: Components of Risk: A Comparative Glossary, pp. 1–48. UNU Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS), Bonn (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tapia, A.H., Moore, K.A., Johnson, N.J.: Beyond the trustworthy tweet: a deeper understanding of microblogged data use by disaster response and humanitarian relief organisations. In: ISCRAM (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mayner, L., Arbon, P.: Defining disaster: the need for harmonisation of terminology. Australas. J. Disaster Trauma Stud. 19, 21–25 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lipson, B., Warren, H.: ‘Taking Stock’–A Snapshot of INGO Engagement in Civil Society Capacity Building. INTRAC International NGO Training and Research Centre, Oxford (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barthe, A.M., Truptil, S., Bénaben, F.: Towards a taxonomy of crisis management simulation tools. In: ISCRAM 2015 Conference Proceedings – 12th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management. Kristiansand, University of Agder (UiA), Norway (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pottebaum, J., Marterer, R., Schneider, S.: Taxonomy of IT support for training emergency response and management. In: ISCRAM 2014 Conference Proceedings – 11th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, pp. 374–378 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Addams-Moring, R., Kekkonen, M., Zhao, S.: A simple taxonomy for mobile emergency announcement systems. In: Proceedings of ISCRAM 2005 – 2nd International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management. Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium, Brussels (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grant, T., Van der Wal, A.J.: A taxonomy of market mechanisms for information sharing in crisis response coalitions. In: Proceedings of the 9th International ISCRAM Conference (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shamoug, A., Juric, R.: Addressing interoperability through the semantic of information highway in managing responses in humanitarian crises. In: Proceedings of the 8th International ISCRAM Conference-Lisbon (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Reuter, C., et al.: Dealing with terminologies in collaborative systems for crisis management. In: Proceedings of the 9th International ISCRAM Conference. Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Temnikova, I., Castillo, C., Vieweg, S.: EMTerms 1.0: a terminological resource for crisis tweets. In: ISCRAM 2015 Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Malizia, A., et al.: Emergency alerts for all: an ontology based approach to improve accessibility in emergency alerting systems. In: Proceedings of ISCRAM 2008 – 5th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management. Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, Washington DC (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Galton, A., Worboys, M.: An ontology of information for emergency management. In Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu, S., Shaw, D., Brewster, C.: Ontologies for crisis management: a review of state of the art in ontology design and usability. In: Proceedings of the ISCRAM 2013 - Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management conference (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Javed, Y., Norris, T., Johnston, D.: Ontology-based inference to enhance team situation awareness in emergency management. In: Proceedings of the ISCRAM 2011 - 8th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, Lisbon (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Barros, R., et al.: Edxl-rescuer ontology: conceptual model for semantic integration. In: Proceedings of the ISCRAM 2015- 12th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gatial, E., Hluchy, L.: Data interoperability approach during major accidents. In: Conference Proceedings ISCRAM 2016 – 13th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management. Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (2016)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Park Jr., J.S.: Enabling cross-organisation interoperability through dynamic directory integration. In: Proceedings of ISCRAM 2005 – 2nd International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management. Brussels: Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium (2005)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Buscher, M., et al.: A new manhattan project?: Interoperability and ethics in emergency response systems of systems. In: Proceedings of ISCRAM 2013 -10th International ISCRAM Conference, Baden-Baden, Germany (2013)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    AIPA: Indonesia’s country report on disaster response management in AIPA caucus report. ASEAN Inter-Parlementary Assembly-AIPA, Manila, Philippines (2011)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Snaprud, M.H., Helmikstøl, G.R.: A Socratic E-learning approach. Int. J. Adv. Corp. Learn. 8(2), 44–46 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mikael Snaprud
    • 1
  • Jaziar Radianti
    • 2
  • Dag Svindseth
    • 3
  1. 1.Tingtun AS, Lillesand, and University of AgderGrimstadNorway
  2. 2.Centre for Integrated Emergency ManagementUniversity of AgderGrimstadNorway
  3. 3.Fire Chief at East Agder Fire DepartmentArendalNorway

Personalised recommendations