The effects of communicating uncertainty around statistics on public trust: an international study

Abstract

A growing body of research indicates that transparent communication of statistical uncertainty around facts and figures does not undermine credibility. However, the extent to which these findings apply in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic--rife with uncertainties--is unclear. In a large international survey experiment, (Study 1; N = 10,519) we report that communicating uncertainty around COVID-19 statistics in the form of a numeric range (vs. no uncertainty) may lead to slightly lower trust in the number presented but has no impact on trust in the source of the information. We also report the minimal impact of numeric uncertainty on trust is consistent across estimates of current or future COVID-19 statistics (Study 2) and figures relating to environmental or economic research, rather than the pandemic (Study 3). Conversely, we find imprecise statements about the mere existence of uncertainty without quantification can undermine both trust in the numbers and their source--though effects vary across countries and contexts. Communicators can be transparent about statistical uncertainty without concerns about undermining perceptions of their trustworthiness, but ideally should aim to use numerical ranges rather than verbal statements.

When evidence changes: Communicating uncertainty protects against a loss of trust

“…Although our study does not provide data on how communicating uncertainty affects participants' trust in the information, several studies suggest that trust in the information is not undermined by communicating uncertainty (e.g. Kerr et al, 2021;van der Bles et al, 2020).…”

Fighting misinformation in seismology: Expert opinion on earthquake facts vs. fiction

“…But does correlation mean causality --the debate continues! "), which may also help explain the lack of consensus on the statement; openness about this uncertainty in communications with the public on this topic will likely be key, especially where the state of knowledge may be set to change (van der Bles et al, 2020;Batteux et al, 2021;Kerr et al, 2021;Schneider et al, 2021).…”