No abstract

For some chemical substances in food, scientific uncertainty prevents definitive statements about the presence of risk for human health. In this qualitative study, we explored the public’s understanding and risk appraisal of these substances. During semi-structured interviews, participants from the public were presented with inconclusive risk information about either a food additive or one of two food contaminants. Findings show that interviewees had no prior knowledge and constructed their risk appraisal on the spot. Results suggest that generic and case specific beliefs and inferences affect understanding and appraisal. Respondents’ interpretations of the risk messages used in this study were often not in line with what the message intended to convey. In addition, specific use of scientific jargon was associated with increased risk. In general, respondents were more apprehensive about the presence of the chemical in food than that they were worried about the chance of experiencing health effects.

In this conceptual review, we describe how the concept of "uncertain risk" is addressed in thePALABRAS CLAVES: comunicació n de riesgos, gestió n de riesgos, incertidumbre

The number of scientific articles has grown rapidly over the years and there are no signs that this growth will slow down in the near future. Because of this, it becomes increasingly difficult to keep up with the latest developments in a scientific field. To address this problem, we present here an approach to help researchers learn about the latest developments and findings by extracting in a normalized form core claims from scientific articles. This normalized representation is a controlled natural language of English sentences called AIDA, which has been proposed in previous work as a method to formally structure and organize scientific findings and discourse. We show how such AIDA sentences can be automatically extracted by detecting the core claim of an article, checking for AIDA compliance, andif necessarytransforming it into a compliant sentence. While our algorithm is still far from perfect, our results indicate that the different steps are feasible and they support the claim that AIDA sentences might be a promising approach to improve scientific communication in the future.