Clarke Christopher E, Dixon Graham N, Holton Avery, McKeever Brooke Weberling
a Department of Communication , George Mason University.
Health Commun. 2015;30(5):461-72. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2013.867006. Epub 2014 Jul 10.
Journalists communicating risk-related uncertainty must accurately convey scientific evidence supporting particular conclusions. Scholars have explored how "balanced" coverage of opposing risk claims shapes uncertainty judgments. In situations where a preponderance of evidence points to a particular conclusion, balanced coverage reduces confidence in such a consensus and heightens uncertainty about whether a risk exists. Using the autism-vaccine controversy as a case study, we describe how journalists can cover multiple sides of an issue and provide insight into where the strength of evidence lies by focusing on "evidentiary balance." Our results suggest that evidentiary balance shapes perceived certainty that vaccines are safe, effective, and not linked to autism through the mediating role of a perception that scientists are divided about whether a link exists. Deference toward science, moreover, moderates these relationships under certain conditions. We discuss implications for journalism practice and risk communication.
报道与风险相关的不确定性的记者必须准确传达支持特定结论的科学证据。学者们探讨了对相互对立的风险主张进行“平衡”报道如何塑造不确定性判断。在大量证据指向特定结论的情况下，平衡报道会降低对这种共识的信心，并加剧对风险是否存在的不确定性。以自闭症与疫苗的争议为例，我们描述了记者如何报道一个问题的多个方面，并通过关注“证据平衡”来深入了解证据的优势所在。我们的结果表明，证据平衡通过一种认为科学家们对是否存在关联存在分歧的认知的中介作用，塑造了人们对疫苗安全、有效且与自闭症无关的确定感。此外，在某些条件下，对科学的尊重会缓和这些关系。我们讨论了对新闻实践和风险沟通的影响。
