The effects of communicating scientific uncertainty on trust and decision making in a public health context

Author:

Schneider Claudia R.ORCID,Freeman Alexandra L. J.ORCID,Spiegelhalter DavidORCID,van der Linden SanderORCID

Abstract

AbstractLarge-scale societal issues such as public health crises highlight the need to communicate scientific information, which is often uncertain, accurately to the public and policy makers. The challenge is to communicate the inherent scientific uncertainty — especially about the underlying quality of the evidence — whilst supporting informed decision making. Little is known about the effects that such scientific uncertainty has on people’s judgments of the information. In three experimental studies (totalN=6,489), we investigate the influence of scientific uncertainty about the quality of the evidence on people’s perceived trustworthiness of the information and decision making. We compare the provision of high, low, and ambiguous quality-of-evidence indicators against providing no such cues. Results show an asymmetric relationship: people react more strongly to cues of low quality of evidence than they do to high quality of evidence compared to no cue. While responses to a cue of high quality of evidence are not significantly different from no cue; a cue of low or uncertain quality of evidence is accompanied by lower perceived trustworthiness and lower use of the information in decision making. Cues of uncertain quality of evidence have a similar effect to those of low quality. These effects do not change with the addition of a reason for the indicated quality level. Our findings shed light on the effects of the communication of scientific uncertainty on judgment and decision making, and provide insights for evidence-based communications and informed decision making for policy makers and the public.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Economics and Econometrics,Applied Psychology,General Decision Sciences

Reference71 articles.

1. Words or numbers? Communicating probability in intelligence analysis.

2. Jenkins, S. C. , Harris, A. J. L. , & Lark, R. M. (2017). Maintaining credibility when communicating uncertainty: The role of communication format. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society ., 582–587. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10039458/.

3. A review of the effects of uncertainty in public science communication

4. Communicating scientific uncertainty

5. IPCC. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R. K. , & Meyer, L. A. (Eds.), IPCC . https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3