Using Weight-of-Experts Messaging to Communicate Accurately About Contested Science

Dunwoody, Sharon; Kohl, Patrice A.

doi:10.1177/1075547017707765

Cited by 46 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While the majority of attention to consensus messaging has focused on climate change, studies have also explored other scientific issues. In support of the GBM, studies have found that interventions which change participants’ perception of a scientific consensus also change their personal beliefs in relation to vaccination [ 20 , 42 , 43 ], pharmaceutical pollution of waterways [ 44 ], scientific whale research and the link between blood type and personality [ 38 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in perceived scientific consensus shift beliefs about climate change and GM food safety

Kerr

Wilson

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite an overwhelming scientific consensus, a sizable minority of people doubt that human activity is causing climate change. Communicating the existence of a scientific consensus has been suggested as a way to correct individuals’ misperceptions about human-caused climate change and other scientific issues, though empirical support is mixed. We report an experiment in which psychology students were presented with consensus information about two issues, and subsequently reported their perception of the level of consensus and extent of their endorsement of those issues. We find that messages about scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change and the safety of genetically modified food shift perceptions of scientific consensus. Using mediation models we also show that, for both these issues, high consensus messages also increase reported personal agreement with the scientific consensus, mediated by changes in perceptions of a scientific consensus. This confirms the role of perceived consensus in informing personal beliefs about climate change, though results indicate the impact of single, one-off messages may be limited.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in perceived scientific consensus shift beliefs about climate change and GM food safety

Kerr

Wilson

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent research has shown that people's perceptions of scientific consensus-the extent to which scientists agree on a scientific issue-predict and influence their beliefs about the issue (Cook & Lewandowsky, 2016;Ding, Maibach, Zhao, Roser-Renouf, & Leiserowitz, 2011;Dixon & Clarke, 2013;Dunwoody & Kohl, 2017;Kohl et al, 2016;Lewandowsky, Gignac, & Vaughan, 2013;McCright, Dunlap, & Xiao, 2013;van der Linden, Clarke, & Maibach, 2015;. That is to say, those who estimate greater consensus among scientists on the existence of a scientific phenomenon (e.g., anthropogenic climate change) or causality (e.g., vaccine-autism link) are more likely to accept and be certain about the scientific phenomenon or causality.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Perceived Scientific and Social Consensus on Scientific Beliefs

Kobayashi

2018

Science Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two studies examined perceptions of scientific and social (social network and public) consensus on scientific issues and their impact on scientific beliefs, using samples of Japanese people. In Study 1 ( N = 434), participants’ estimates of scientific and social consensus predicted their scientific beliefs independently of each other. In Study 2 ( N = 694), the presentation of scientific and public consensus information as an anchor for consensus estimation influenced participants’ scientific beliefs through their perceptions of scientific and public consensus. The perceived credibility of scientists had little if any effect on the relationship between perceived scientific consensus and scientific beliefs.

show abstract

“…Developing highly tailored campaigns and interventions for specific target audiences is likely to yield the most promising results in changing the publics' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors toward potential environmental breast cancer risks (19). When communicating uncertain scientific findings to the public, one effective strategy is to present multiple claims and then state how many experts believe each claim, generating perceptions of certainty about a scientific claim (20). If a breast cancer risk message conveys the number of scientists who believe there is a need to take environmental risks seriously, this might motivate members of the public to engage in precautionary behaviors such as avoiding consumer products that contain chemical toxins.…”

Section: Individual Focus: the Bottom-up Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epigeneti-What? Approaches on Translating Research for Primary Breast Cancer Prevention

Perrault

Hildenbrand²,

Nyaga³

2019

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In fiscal year 2017, the National Cancer Institute devoted more than a half billion dollars to breast cancer research. Since 2012, the total investment has been more than $3 billion. Despite this significant investment, breast cancer still has no known immediate causes as it generally develops over the life course. Therefore, research is unable to provide the public any sort of magic bullet, or conclusive link between certain environmental exposures and the development of breast cancer later in life. What research is only able to report are likelihoods—possible links—things people might want to consider avoiding or doing in their everyday lives to reduce their future risks of developing breast cancer. This abundance of rigorously performed, albeit causally inconclusive, research focused on “plausible” links poses a challenge for health communicators who are tasked with seeking to find ways to translate this science into advice that people can act upon today. However, if society must wait for the science to provide 100% conclusive evidence before anyone ever takes action, how many lives could have been saved in the interim? Therefore, we advocate a two-pronged approach to translating scientific findings regarding environmental exposures and breast cancer prevention: a bottom-up approach—focused on informing the lay public and individuals, while simultaneously performing a top-down approach—focused on influencing policymakers. The current perspective analyzes the strengths and weaknesses to both of these approaches, and encourages scientists to work closely with health communicators to develop theoretically-driven strategies to drive positive changes over time.

show abstract

Using Weight-of-Experts Messaging to Communicate Accurately About Contested Science

Cited by 46 publications

References 47 publications

Changes in perceived scientific consensus shift beliefs about climate change and GM food safety

Changes in perceived scientific consensus shift beliefs about climate change and GM food safety

The Impact of Perceived Scientific and Social Consensus on Scientific Beliefs

Epigeneti-What? Approaches on Translating Research for Primary Breast Cancer Prevention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About