Communicating Uncertain Science to the Public: How Amount and Source of Uncertainty Impact Fatalism, Backlash, and Overload

Jakob D. Jensen; Manusheela Pokharel; Courtney L. Scherr; Andy J. King; Natasha Brown; Christina Jones

doi:10.1111/risa.12600

Communicating Uncertain Science to the Public: How Amount and Source of Uncertainty Impact Fatalism, Backlash, and Overload

Jakob D. Jensen^*, Manusheela Pokharel, Courtney L. Scherr, Andy J. King, Natasha Brown, Christina Jones

^*Corresponding author for this work

Communication Studies

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

53 Scopus citations

Abstract

Public dissemination of scientific research often focuses on the finding (e.g., nanobombs kill lung cancer) rather than the uncertainty/limitations (e.g., in mice). Adults (n = 880) participated in an experiment where they read a manipulated news report about cancer research (a) that contained either low or high uncertainty (b) that was attributed to the scientists responsible for the research (disclosure condition) or an unaffiliated scientist (dueling condition). Compared to the dueling condition, the disclosure condition triggered less prevention-focused cancer fatalism and nutritional backlash.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	40-51
Number of pages	12
Journal	Risk Analysis
Volume	37
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12600
State	Published - Jan 1 2017

Funding

The writing of this article was partially supported by a grant from the National Cancer Institute, R25 CA 090314 (providing postdoctoral training support for Dr. Scherr).

Keywords

Cancer
cancer information overload
fatalism
nutritional backlash
uncertainty

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality
Physiology (medical)

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1111/risa.12600

Cite this

@article{ebc3210638b844a68e76b7f78ede1883,

title = "Communicating Uncertain Science to the Public: How Amount and Source of Uncertainty Impact Fatalism, Backlash, and Overload",

abstract = "Public dissemination of scientific research often focuses on the finding (e.g., nanobombs kill lung cancer) rather than the uncertainty/limitations (e.g., in mice). Adults (n = 880) participated in an experiment where they read a manipulated news report about cancer research (a) that contained either low or high uncertainty (b) that was attributed to the scientists responsible for the research (disclosure condition) or an unaffiliated scientist (dueling condition). Compared to the dueling condition, the disclosure condition triggered less prevention-focused cancer fatalism and nutritional backlash.",

keywords = "Cancer, cancer information overload, fatalism, nutritional backlash, uncertainty",

author = "Jensen, {Jakob D.} and Manusheela Pokharel and Scherr, {Courtney L.} and King, {Andy J.} and Natasha Brown and Christina Jones",

note = "Funding Information: The writing of this article was partially supported by a grant from the National Cancer Institute, R25 CA 090314 (providing postdoctoral training support for Dr. Scherr). Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2016 Society for Risk Analysis",

year = "2017",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1111/risa.12600",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "37",

pages = "40--51",

journal = "Risk Analysis",

issn = "0272-4332",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Communicating Uncertain Science to the Public

T2 - How Amount and Source of Uncertainty Impact Fatalism, Backlash, and Overload

AU - Jensen, Jakob D.

AU - Pokharel, Manusheela

AU - Scherr, Courtney L.

AU - King, Andy J.

AU - Brown, Natasha

AU - Jones, Christina

N1 - Funding Information: The writing of this article was partially supported by a grant from the National Cancer Institute, R25 CA 090314 (providing postdoctoral training support for Dr. Scherr). Publisher Copyright: © 2016 Society for Risk Analysis

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Public dissemination of scientific research often focuses on the finding (e.g., nanobombs kill lung cancer) rather than the uncertainty/limitations (e.g., in mice). Adults (n = 880) participated in an experiment where they read a manipulated news report about cancer research (a) that contained either low or high uncertainty (b) that was attributed to the scientists responsible for the research (disclosure condition) or an unaffiliated scientist (dueling condition). Compared to the dueling condition, the disclosure condition triggered less prevention-focused cancer fatalism and nutritional backlash.

AB - Public dissemination of scientific research often focuses on the finding (e.g., nanobombs kill lung cancer) rather than the uncertainty/limitations (e.g., in mice). Adults (n = 880) participated in an experiment where they read a manipulated news report about cancer research (a) that contained either low or high uncertainty (b) that was attributed to the scientists responsible for the research (disclosure condition) or an unaffiliated scientist (dueling condition). Compared to the dueling condition, the disclosure condition triggered less prevention-focused cancer fatalism and nutritional backlash.

KW - Cancer

KW - cancer information overload

KW - fatalism

KW - nutritional backlash

KW - uncertainty

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84960933586&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84960933586&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/risa.12600

DO - 10.1111/risa.12600

M3 - Article

C2 - 26973157

AN - SCOPUS:84960933586

SN - 0272-4332

VL - 37

SP - 40

EP - 51

JO - Risk Analysis

JF - Risk Analysis

IS - 1

ER -

Communicating Uncertain Science to the Public: How Amount and Source of Uncertainty Impact Fatalism, Backlash, and Overload

Abstract

Funding

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this