Emily Vraga, Teresa Myers, John Kotcher, Lindsey Beall, Ed Maibach
Center for Climate Change Communication, Department of Communication, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA.
R Soc Open Sci. 2018 Feb 21;5(2):170505. doi: 10.1098/rsos.170505. eCollection 2018 Feb.
Many scientists communicate with the public about risks associated with scientific issues, but such communication may have unintended consequences for how the public views the political orientations and the credibility of the communicating scientist. We explore this possibility using an experiment with a nationally representative sample of Americans in the fall of 2015. We find that risk communication on controversial scientific issues sometimes influences perceptions of the political orientations and credibility of the communicating scientist when the scientist addresses the risks of issues associated with conservative or liberal groups. This relationship is moderated by participant political ideology, with liberals adjusting their perceptions of the scientists' political beliefs more substantially when the scientist addressed the risks of marijuana use when compared with other issues. Conservatives' political perceptions were less impacted by the issue context of the scientific risk communication but indirectly influenced credibility perceptions. Our results support a contextual model of audience interpretation of scientific risk communication. Scientists should be cognizant that audience members may make inferences about the communicating scientist's political orientations and credibility when they engage in risk communication efforts about controversial issues.
许多科学家就与科学问题相关的风险与公众进行沟通，但这种沟通可能会对公众如何看待沟通科学家的政治倾向和可信度产生意想不到的后果。我们在2015年秋季对具有全国代表性的美国样本进行了一项实验，以探究这种可能性。我们发现，当科学家讨论与保守或自由派团体相关问题的风险时，就有争议的科学问题进行的风险沟通有时会影响对沟通科学家政治倾向和可信度的看法。这种关系受到参与者政治意识形态的调节，与其他问题相比，当科学家讨论大麻使用风险时，自由派会更显著地调整他们对科学家政治信仰的看法。保守派的政治看法受科学风险沟通的问题背景影响较小，但会间接影响对可信度的看法。我们的结果支持了受众对科学风险沟通的解释的情境模型。科学家应该认识到，当他们就有争议的问题进行风险沟通时，受众成员可能会对沟通科学家的政治倾向和可信度做出推断。
