Health controversies

References

1. Aakhus, Mark
   1999 “Science court: A Case Study in Designing Discourse to Manage Policy Controversy.” Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 12(2), 20–37. 10.1007/s12130‑999‑1020‑6
   https://doi.org/10.1007/s12130-999-1020-6 [Google Scholar]
2. Aakhus, Mark
   2007 “Communication as Design.” Communication Monographs, 74(1), 112–117. 10.1080/03637750701196383
   https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750701196383 [Google Scholar]
3. Aakhus, Mark, and Michael Bzdak
   2015 “Stakeholder Engagement as Communication Design Practice.” Journal of Public Affairs, 15(2), 188–200. 10.1002/pa.1569
   https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1569 [Google Scholar]
4. Dryzek, John S., André Bächtiger, Simone Chambers, Joshua Cohen, James N. Druckman, Andrea Felicetti, James S. Fishkin
   2019 “The Crisis of Democracy and the Science of Deliberation.” Science363(6432), 1144–1146. 10.1126/science.aaw2694
   https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw2694 [Google Scholar]
5. Dumit, Joseph
   2006 “Illnesses You Have to Fight to Get: Facts as Forces in Uncertain, Emergent Illnesses.” Social Science & Medicine, 62(3), 577–590. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.06.018
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.06.018 [Google Scholar]
6. Epstein, Stephen
   1995 “The Construction of Lay Expertise: AIDS Activism and the Forging of Credibility in the Reform of Clinical Trials.” Science, Technology, & Human Values20 (4): 408–37. 10.1177/016224399502000402
   https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399502000402 [Google Scholar]
7. Fair, Brian
   2010 “Morgellons: Contested Illness, Diagnostic Compromise and Medicalisation.” Sociology of Health & Illness, 32(4), 597–612. 10.1111/j.1467‑9566.2009.01227.x
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01227.x [Google Scholar]
8. Hintz, Elizabeth A.
   2022 “‘It’s All in Your Head’: A Meta-Synthesis of Qualitative Research About Disenfranchising Talk Experienced by Female Patients with Chronic Overlapping Pain Conditions.” Health Communication, 38(11), 2501–2515. 10.1080/10410236.2022.2081046
   https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2022.2081046 [Google Scholar]
9. Jackson, Sally
   2008 “Message Effects Research.” InRhetoric and Stylistics: An International Handbook of Historical and Systematic Research, Vol. 1, ed. byUlla Fix, Andreas Gardt, and Joachim Knape, 855–868. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110211405.4.855
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110211405.4.855 [Google Scholar]
10. Jackson, Sally
    2023 “Online Health Communities in Controversy over ME/CFS and Long Covid.” European Journal of Health Communication, 4(2), 49–72. 10.47368/ejhc.2023.203
    https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2023.203 [Google Scholar]
11. Jackson, Sally
    2024 “Health Controversies: Long-Term Disagreement Management Challenges.” Journal of Health Communication, 29(8), 490–501. 10.1080/10810730.2024.2369810
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2024.2369810 [Google Scholar]
12. Jackson, Sally, and Scott Jacobs
    1980 “Structure of Conversational Argument: Pragmatic Bases for the Enthymeme.” Quarterly Journal of Speech, 661, 251–265. 10.1080/00335638009383524
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638009383524 [Google Scholar]
13. Lasker, Judith N., Ellen D. Sogolow, and Rebecca R. Sharim
    2005 “The Role of an Online Community for People with a Rare Disease: Content Analysis of Messages Posted on a Primary Biliary Cirrhosis Mailinglist.” Journal of Medical Internet Research, 7(1), e137. 10.2196/jmir.7.1.e10
    https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.7.1.e10 [Google Scholar]
14. Lewiński, Marcin, and Mark Aakhus
    2023 Argumentation in Complex Communication: Managing Disagreement in a Polylogue. Cambridge, England: Cambridge U. Press.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Lian, Olaug S., and Sarah Nettleton
    2015 “‘United We Stand’: Framing Myalgic Encephalomyelitis in a Virtual Symbolic Community.” Qualitative Health Research, 25(10), 1383–1394. 10.1177/1049732314562893
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732314562893 [Google Scholar]
16. Malterud, Kirsti
    2001 “The Art and Science of Clinical Knowledge: Evidence beyond Measures and Numbers.” The Lancet, 358(9279), 397–400. 10.1016/S0140‑6736(01)05548‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05548-9 [Google Scholar]
17. Miyake, Esperanza, and Sam Martin
    2021 “Long Covid: Online Patient Narratives, Public Health Communication and Vaccine Hesitancy.” Digital Health, 71. 10.1177/20552076211059649
    https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076211059649 [Google Scholar]
18. O’Keefe, Daniel J.
    2016 Persuasion: Theory and Research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Ottinger, Gwen
    2010 “Buckets of Resistance: Standards and the Effectiveness of Citizen Science.” Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35 (2), 244–270. 10.1177/0162243909337121
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243909337121 [Google Scholar]
20. Schneider, Jodi, and Sally Jackson
    2018 “Modeling the Invention of a New Inference Rule: The Case of ‘Randomized Clinical Trial’ as an Argument Scheme for Medical Science.” Argument & Computation, 9(2), 77–89. 10.3233/AAC‑180036
    https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-180036 [Google Scholar]
21. Thompson, Charee M., and Sarah Parsloe
    2019 “‘I Don’t Claim to be the World’s Foremost Expert, But’: How Individuals ‘Know’ Family Members are not Experiencing Health Issues as Severely as They Claim.” Qualitative Health Research, 29(10), 1433–1446. 10.1177/1049732319827518
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732319827518 [Google Scholar]
22. Toulmin, Stephen E.
    1958 The Uses of Argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Van Eemeren, Frans H., and Rob Grootendorst
    2004 A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge.
    [Google Scholar]
24. van Eemeren, Frans H. and Wu Peng
    2017 Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.12
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.12 [Google Scholar]
25. Venturini, Tommaso
    2010 “Diving in Magma: How to Explore Controversies with Actor-Network Theory.” Public Understanding of Science, 19(3), 258–273. 10.1177/0963662509102694
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509102694 [Google Scholar]
26. Walton, Douglas N., Chris Reed, and Fabrizio Macagno
    2008 Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge. 10.1017/CBO9780511802034
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802034 [Google Scholar]
27. Willard, Charles A.
    1987 “Valuing Dissensus.” InAcross the Lines of Disciplinesed. byFrans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair and Charles A. Willard, 145–158. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110867718.145
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110867718.145 [Google Scholar]
28. Xu, Yiwei, Drew Margolin, and Jeff Niederdeppe
    2020 “Testing Strategies to Increase Source Credibility through Strategic Message Design in the Context of Vaccination and Vaccine Hesitancy.” Health Communication, 36(11), 1354–1367. 10.1080/10410236.2020.1751400
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1751400 [Google Scholar]
29. Zenker, Frank, Jan Albert Van Laar, Bianca Cepollaro, Anja Gâţă, Martin Hinton, Colin Guthrie King, B. Larson
    2024 “Norms of Public Argumentation and the Ideals of Correctness and Participation.” Argumentation, 38(1), 7–40. 10.1007/s10503‑023‑09598‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-023-09598-6 [Google Scholar]