Browse all Publications

Filter by section: Article

Publications included in this section.

523 publications found

Dec 16, 2024 Article
Trust in science, trust in ChatGPT? How Germans think about generative AI as a source in science communication

by Mike S. Schäfer, Bastian Kremer, Niels G. Mede and Liliann Fischer

Generative AI like ChatGPT has been diagnosed to fundamentally impact different realms of life. This includes science communication, where GenAI tools are becoming important sources of science-related content for many people. This raises the question of whether people trust GenAI as a source in this field, a question that has not been answered sufficiently yet. Adapting a model developed by Roberts et al. [2013] and utilizing survey data from the German Science Barometer 2023, we find that Germans are rather sceptical about and do not strongly trust GenAI in science communication. Structural equation modelling shows that respondents' trust in GenAI as a source in science communication is driven strongly by their general trust in science, which is largely driven by their knowledge about science and the perception that science improves quality of life.

Volume 23 • Issue 09 • 2024 • Special Issue: Public (dis)trust in science in digital media environments

Dec 16, 2024 Article
Public perceptions of trustworthiness and authenticity towards scientists in controversial scientific fields

by Markus Schug, Helena Bilandzic and Susanne Kinnebrock

This study investigates public perceptions of trustworthiness and authenticity regarding scientists engaged in controversial and less controversial fields with a cross-sectional survey of a German sample (“N” = 1007). Results indicate that scientists in controversial fields like COVID-19 or climate change are perceived as less trustworthy and authentic compared to scientists in less controversial fields or scientists without specification of their field. Additionally, we found that science-related media consumption shaped people´s trustworthiness and authenticity perceptions towards scientists. Our analysis points out how public perceptions of scientists vary if these scientists research controversial areas, actively participating in public (and media) life.

Volume 23 • Issue 09 • 2024 • Special Issue: Public (dis)trust in science in digital media environments

Dec 16, 2024 Article
“I think it gave me a little bit of mistrust”: exploring trust in COVID-19 science among college students

by Ch'Ree Essary

As the late teen and early adulthood years have been identified as a period in life where opinions regarding politics are formed, it is important to understand how the highly politicized science issue — the COVID-19 pandemic — may have influenced young adults’ trust in science and how they come to know the accuracy of science information. In order to explore these topics, this study employed a series of focus groups with college students (N = 22). Findings show that while focus group participants were largely trusting of science and science institutions, they were wary of government and politician interference in science and scientists who lack the integrity and benevolence to act in the best interests of the public.

Volume 23 • Issue 09 • 2024 • Special Issue: Public (dis)trust in science in digital media environments

Dec 16, 2024 Article
The effects of witnessing harassment of scientists on public perceptions of science

by Jana Laura Egelhofer, Christina Seeger and Alice Binder

Scientists are increasingly affected by harassment, especially on social media. While initial research highlights the detrimental consequences for affected scientists, the increased visibility of harassment through social media might also negatively affect public perceptions of scientists. Using a preregistered 2x2 between-subjects experiment (N = 1,246), this study shows that exposure to uncivil comments harassing female or male scientists negatively affects citizens’ trust in the attacked scientists but not trust in scientists in general or scientific information. Furthermore, some of the effects are moderated by gender and science-related populist attitudes.

Volume 23 • Issue 09 • 2024 • Special Issue: Public (dis)trust in science in digital media environments

Dec 09, 2024 Article
How should scientists act? Assessing public perceptions of scientists and scientific practices and their implications for science communication

by Thomas G. Safford and Emily H. Whitmore

Is how science is conducted legitimate? Are scientists trustworthy? Whether the public answers “yes” to these questions is critical for science communicators. We explore how social factors affect public perceptions of the practice of science, and then test how those beliefs relate to views about how scientists engage with the public and policy making. Our results show that political ideology and religiosity affect these views. However, more importantly, respondents' concerns about the integrity of the scientific process are the strongest predictor of views about scientists' behavior, providing a focus area for future communication efforts in support of science-based decision making.

Volume 23 • Issue 08 • 2024

Nov 25, 2024 Article
Anthropomorphism and motivating participation in citizen science projects

by Zoey Rosen, Marilee Long, Bonne Ford, Eric A. Wendt, Michael Cheeseman, Casey Quinn, Christian L'Orange, John Volckens and Jeffrey R. Pierce

Maintaining long-term participation in citizen science projects is challenging; thus, it is important for project developers to use effective techniques to motivate participants. One approach is to incorporate anthropomorphism (ascribing humanlike qualities to a non-human agent) when designing and deploying technology. In a quasi-experimental study conducted as part of the Citizen-Enabled Aerosol Measurements for Satellites (CEAMS) citizen science project, we investigated the relationship between anthropomorphism and motivation to participate in citizen science. Findings showed partial support for the relationship between anthropomorphism and motivation.

Volume 23 • Issue 08 • 2024

Nov 18, 2024 Article
Who trusts in scientific research? Cross-national surveys of Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States

by Asako Miura, Mei Yamagata, Jin Higashijima, Toshiya Kobayashi and Masaki Nakamura

In this study, we explored science understanding and attitudes in Japan compared to the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US), examining trust in science versus humanities. Our web-based survey revealed that Japan's research literacy matches its Western counterparts. However, there were notable differences in scientific knowledge depth and public trust in research. Interestingly, higher scientific knowledge correlated with increased trust in research outcomes, a trend not seen in the humanities. In Japan, political ideologies did not significantly influence trust in science or humanities and showed little correlation with scientific knowledge or research literacy. This contrasts with the UK and the US, where political ideology impacts public trust in these fields.

Volume 23 • Issue 08 • 2024

Nov 11, 2024 Article
Narrative misinformation from a credible source can be discredited with counternarrative

by Nathanael Johnson and Glenn Sparks

Former government intelligence officer David Grusch became a hot new topic in the UFO world when he declared that the government was hiding an alien ship crash retrieval program. Can this media coverage be influential in increasing belief in UFOs? And can a credible critic of Grusch's claims successfully negate the impact of the media coverage on the acceptance of misinformation? A three-condition experiment (N=287) showed that a counternarrative can successfully negate the influence of his claims on conspiratorial beliefs. We suggest that these results have practical implications for journalists in their coverage of controversial claims.

Volume 23 • Issue 08 • 2024

Oct 28, 2024 Article
Characterization of polarized scientific digital messages: a scoping review

by Ana Maria Jucá, Matheus Lotto, Agnes Cruvinel and Thiago Cruvinel

This scoping review elucidated the characteristics of polarized scientific digital messages credited by researchers for studying the impact of content on people's perceptions. Inclusion criteria encompassed discourse and content analysis studies examining the syntactic and lexical features of polarized messages in online science communication, as well as crossover and randomized information intervention studies. Studies without sufficient detail for data extraction or that did not address message characteristics were excluded. After these exclusions, 10 studies were evaluated for the outcomes. Characteristics of polarized messages were observed to include topic dependency, single viewpoint, discredit of opposing views, emphasis on the minority and flaws of concurrent discourses, and uses of assertive statements, intensifiers, controversy, partisanship, skepticism, sarcasm, vague lexicons, and expert opinion support. As a result, we propose a system of codification for identifying and characterizing polarized discourses in science communication digital messages that can be employed in further content analysis studies.

Volume 23 • Issue 08 • 2024

Oct 21, 2024 Article
The coverage of basic and applied research in press releases on EurekAlert!

by Jingwen Zhang, Marina Joubert, Jonathan Dudek and Rodrigo Costas

Research organisations routinely reach out to the media via press releases to announce research news and promote advances in science. This paper explores the presence of basic and applied research in press releases issued through EurekAlert!. Using a scientometric approach to classify research papers featured in press releases into basic and applied research, we found that more than half of the press releases in our dataset were related to basic research. This trend was particularly notable in life and earth sciences, physical sciences, and engineering fields. In contrast, press releases in the biomedical and health sciences, as well as in social sciences and humanities, were more frequently associated with applied research. Additionally, we present findings on the similarity and readability of press releases compared to their corresponding research papers, which confirm the role of institutional press officers in making research papers more accessible to the public and media. This adaptation appears to be more pronounced for basic research.

Volume 23 • Issue 07 • 2024 • Special Issue: Communicating Discovery Science