This article contributes to inquiry on storytelling practice through analysis of the strategies that engineers adopt when reasoning through a disaster scenario. In hazardous industries, engineering work is closely linked to disaster prevention, and analysis of past cases is a key learning strategy. Natural gas pipeline project personnel were presented with the case of the Überlingen mid-air aircraft collision—an incident outside their sector that they were mostly unfamiliar with. Two techniques were used to make sense of the disaster causation and its implications for participants’ work. First, participants reasoned through applying abstract principles to the case, and specifically their knowledge of safety management underpinned by engineering risk management and organizational safety approaches. Second, participants sought to appreciate the events through stories. Where previous narrative research has suggested that narrative reasoning is better suited to values-oriented judgments, we found that participants also used stories to make sense of technical issues. Stories were principally used analogically, as the engineers sought to clarify what the events at Überlingen were a “case of” and so how they might be relevant to their professional practice. This analogical reasoning served to resolve narrative ambiguity. Stories were used by most participants to debate points with peers, though tellers of longer accounts tended to be those with more experience and organizational seniority.

中文翻译：

---

“这就是我们的辩论方式”：工程师使用故事进行灾难因果推理

本文通过分析工程师在通过灾难场景进行推理时采用的策略来探究讲故事的实践。在危险行业，工程工作与防灾密切相关，对过去案例的分析是一项重要的学习策略。向天然气管道项目人员介绍了 Überlingen 空中飞机相撞事件——这是他们所在部门以外的事件，他们大多不熟悉。使用两种技术来理解灾难的因果关系及其对参与者工作的影响。首先，参与者通过将抽象原则应用于案例进行推理，特别是他们以工程风险管理和组织安全方法为基础的安全管理知识。第二，参与者试图通过故事来欣赏这些事件。先前的叙事研究表明叙事推理更适合以价值观为导向的判断，我们发现参与者还使用故事来理解技术问题。故事主要用于类比，因为工程师们试图澄清 Überlingen 的事件是一个“案例”，以及它们如何与他们的专业实践相关。这种类比推理有助于解决叙述的歧义。大多数参与者使用故事来与同龄人辩论观点，尽管较长帐户的出纳员往往是那些经验丰富、组织资历更丰富的人。我们发现参与者还使用故事来理解技术问题。故事主要用于类比，因为工程师们试图澄清 Überlingen 的事件是一个“案例”，以及它们如何与他们的专业实践相关。这种类比推理有助于解决叙述的歧义。大多数参与者使用故事来与同龄人辩论观点，尽管较长帐户的出纳员往往是那些经验丰富、组织资历更丰富的人。我们发现参与者还使用故事来理解技术问题。故事主要用于类比，因为工程师们试图澄清 Überlingen 的事件是一个“案例”，以及它们如何与他们的专业实践相关。这种类比推理有助于解决叙述的歧义。大多数参与者使用故事来与同龄人辩论观点，尽管较长帐户的出纳员往往是那些经验丰富、组织资历更丰富的人。