Abstract
ABSTRACT The potential of maps to ‘mislead’ is flagged as an ethical issue in the academic literature and beyond. This potential resurfaced in discussions around COVID-19 mapping practices. Using Alvesson and Sandberg’s (2020) problematizing review framework, we explore what assumptions are made about the map user and map engagement context when a disease map, or mapping or distribution practice is labelled as misleading, and how this conceptualization can be both a help and a hindrance for studying (engagement with) public health maps. We argue that further empirical research and theoretical development are needed to better understand map-based misleadingness in the context of public health crises, and that the label of misleadingness should be used with caution.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call