Evoking vigilance
Would you (dis)trust a scientist who discusses ethical implications of research in a science blog
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20403274 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Friederike Hendriks (0000-0003-1023-8103, University of Münster, corresponding author), Dorothe Kienhues (0000-0002-8250-627X, University of Münster), Rainer Bromme (0000-0002-6123-7269, University of Münster) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 25 |
| Issue | 8 |
| Pages | 992-1008 |
| Publication date | 2016-11-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Public Understanding of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0963-6625 • E-ISSN: 1361-6609 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0963662516646048 |
| PMID | 27150266 |
| OpenAlex | W2346614487 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 19 |
| References cited | 42 |
The experimental studies presented here investigated whether discussing ethical implications of preliminary scientific results in a science blog would impact blog readers’ perception of the responsible scientist blogger’s epistemic trustworthiness (on the dimensions expertise, integrity, and benevolence). They also investigated whether it made a difference in who had brought forward the ethics aspects: the responsible scientist blogger or another expert. Results indicate that by the mere introduction of ethics, people infer something about the blogger’s communicative intentions: Introducing ethical aspects seems to raise vigilance about an expert’s benevolence and integrity. Moreover, ratings of epistemic trustworthiness differed depending on who added ethical arguments: If ethics were introduced by the scientist blogger himself, his benevolence and integrity were rated higher than when ethics were introduced by another expert. These results are relevant for science bloggers, science communicators, and researchers who study laypeople’s understanding of epistemic uncertainty within science
Engineering ethics · Epistemology · Perception · Political science · Public relations · Research ethics · Research integrity · Sociology · Trustworthiness · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Educational Strategies and Epistemologies · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology
Storifying instructional videos on online credibility evaluation
Examining the structure of credibility evaluation when sixth graders read online texts
A New Obligation or a Natural Extension? STEM Scientists’ Science Communication in the Context of Their Professional Role Identities
The Public Trust in Science Scale
Genome-edited versus genetically-modified tomatoes
Replication crisis = trust crisis? The effect of successful vs failed replications on laypeople’s trust in researchers and research
Scientific uncertainty in media content
Mediating trust in content about science
Attacking science on social media
Scientific uncertainty in media content
Indicators of trustworthiness in lay-friendly research summaries
The problems of increasing transparency on uncertainty
How the public evaluates media representations of uncertain science
Believing in science
Disclose your flaws! Admission positively affects the perceived trustworthiness of an expert science blogger
Understanding scientific tentativeness through bat ecology
Face Masks Might Protect You From Covid-19
Bridging the Divide
Open Science and the Science-Society Relationship
Trusting What You're Told
Addressing Challenges to Public Understanding of Science
Public Communication of Science in Blogs
Trust in News Media
The Public's Bounded Understanding of Science
Measuring the perceived uncertainty of scientific evidence and its relationship to engagement with science
Social and Heuristic Approaches to Credibility Evaluation Online
Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility
The Role of Media and Deference to Scientific Authority in Cultivating Trust in Sources of Information about Emerging Technologies
The Effectiveness of Supportive and Refutational Defenses in Immunizing and Restoring Beliefs Against Persuasion
Scientific Uncertainty in News Coverage of Cancer Research
Medialization of Research Policy
Causal inferences about communicators and their effect on opinion change
"The "Nasty Effect
Making Science
| Unique citing works | 19 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,9 |
| Citation span | 2016 - 2026 (11) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 19 |