CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 940Disaster Management and ResiliencePublic Relations and Crisis CommunicationSafety and Risk Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Crisis Management in Hindsight: Cognition, Communication, Coordination, and Control

Comfort, Louise K.·2007·Public Administration Review
DOI 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00827.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article argues that cognition is central to performance in emergency management. Cognition is defined as the capacity to recognize the degree of emerging risk to which a community is exposed and to act on that information. Using the case of Hurricane Katrina to illustrate the collapse of the standard model of emergency management without a clear focus on the role of cognition, the author reframes the concept of intergovernmental crisis management as a complex, adaptive system. That is, the system needs to adjust and adapt its performance to fit the demands of an ever‐changing physical, engineered, and social environment. The terms of cognition, communication, coordination, and control are redefined in ways that fit the reality of practice in extreme events. A reframed intergovernmental crisis management system may be conceived as a dynamic interorganizational system that is characterized by four primary decision points: (1) detection of risk, (2) recognition and interpretation of risk for the immediate context, (3) communication of risk to multiple organizations in a wider region, and (4) self‐organization and mobilization of a collective, community response system to reduce risk and respond to danger.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00827.x

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 18 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Alkan Michael L.2006.Things I Learned from Working with Victims of Hurricane Katrina. Paper presented at the Conference on Future Challenges for Crisis Management in Europe May 4–5 Stockholm Sweden.
  2. Kiel Douglas, 1994, Managing Chaos and Complexity in Government
  3. MacCash Doug, 2005, City Must Overcome Disaster, Mayor Says; Nagin: Response Still Isn’t Enough, Times-Picayune
  4. Simon Herbert A, 1997, The Sciences of the Artificial

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 901–937 of 937

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Comfort, L. K.
Affiliations
University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Comfort, Louise K.
ORCID
Comfort, Louise K.
Venue
Public Administration Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-12
Volume
67
Issue
s1
Pages
189-197
ISSN
  • 0033-3352 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-6210
DOI
10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00827.x
OpenAlex
W2089773578
Cited by
940
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 116 · 2025: 82 · 2024: 66 · 2023: 95 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 71 · 2020: 69 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 52 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 28
FWCI
35.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 6 d)
Locations
Public Administration Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Safety and Risk Management
Keywords
crisis management, emergency management, cognition, Hurricane Katrina, complex adaptive systems, interorganizational systems, risk identification, risk communication, coordination, control, self-organization, community response, extreme events

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review