Joffe Helene, Rossetto Tiziana, Bradley Caroline, O'Connor Cliodhna
Professor of Psychology in the Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, United Kingdom.
Professor of Earthquake Engineering in the Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering, University College London, United Kingdom.
Disasters. 2018 Jan;42(1):81-100. doi: 10.1111/disa.12237. Epub 2017 May 17.
This paper explores how earthquake scientists conceptualise earthquake prediction, particularly given the conviction of six earthquake scientists for manslaughter (subsequently overturned) on 22 October 2012 for having given inappropriate advice to the public prior to the L'Aquila earthquake of 6 April 2009. In the first study of its kind, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 earthquake scientists and the transcribed interviews were analysed thematically. The scientists primarily denigrated earthquake prediction, showing strong emotive responses and distancing themselves from earthquake 'prediction' in favour of 'forecasting'. Earthquake prediction was regarded as impossible and harmful. The stigmatisation of the subject is discussed in the light of research on boundary work and stigma in science. The evaluation reveals how mitigation becomes the more favoured endeavour, creating a normative environment that disadvantages those who continue to pursue earthquake prediction research. Recommendations are made for communication with the public on earthquake risk, with a focus on how scientists portray uncertainty.
本文探讨了地震科学家如何对地震预测进行概念化,特别是考虑到2012年10月22日有六位地震科学家因在2009年4月6日拉奎拉地震发生前向公众提供了不当建议而被判过失杀人罪(随后判决被推翻)这一情况。在同类研究中首次开展的这项研究里,对17位地震科学家进行了半结构化访谈,并对访谈转录文本进行了主题分析。科学家们主要诋毁地震预测,表现出强烈的情绪化反应,并将自己与地震“预测”划清界限,转而支持“预报”。地震预测被视为不可能且有害的。结合关于科学领域的划界工作和污名化的研究,对这一主题的污名化现象进行了讨论。评估揭示了减灾如何成为更受青睐的努力方向,从而营造了一种对那些继续从事地震预测研究的人不利的规范环境。文中就与公众进行地震风险沟通提出了建议,重点关注科学家如何描述不确定性。