Pular para o conteúdo principal

ETHNOS_APP

Início • Busca • Periódicos • Lista 0

Examining the Impact of Expert Voices

Communicating the Scientific Consensus on Genetically-modified Organisms

Dados Bibliográficos

ID21192556
AutoresAsheley R Landrum (0000-0002-3074-804X, Texas Tech University, autor correspondente), William K Hallman (0000-0002-4524-9876, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey), Kathleen Hall Jamieson (0000-0002-4167-3688, University of Pennsylvania)
Ano2019
Volume13
Fascículo1
Páginas51-70
Data de publicação2019-01-02
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoEnvironmental Communication (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1752-4032 • E-ISSN: 1752-4040
EditoraInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/17524032.2018.1502201
OpenAlexW2888317736
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas21
Referências citadas32

© 2018, © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. None

Biology · Climate change · Epistemology · Perception · Political science · Politics · Public opinion · Public relations · Scientific consensus · Scientific evidence · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Law · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Psychology · Risk Perception and Management · Social Psychology

  • How Citizens View Science Communication

    Open Access•Carolina Moreno-Castro, Aneta Krzewińska et al.•How Citizens View Science…•2024

  • An Experimental Evidence on Public Acceptance of Genetically Modified Food through Advertisement Framing on Health and Environmental Benefits, Objective Knowledge, and Risk Reduction

    Open Access•Syed Hassan Raza, Umer Zaman et al.•International Journal of…•2021

  • Risk or License? Precautionary Principle’s Transition in Genetically Modified Organisms’ Benefits After Job Creation Law

    Open Access•Rudi Natamiharja, Orima Melati Davey et al.•Udayana Journal of Law and Culture•2022

  • Reporting on Science as an Ongoing Process (or Not)

    Open Access•Matthew H Slater, Emily R Scholfield et al.•Frontiers in Communication•2021

  • Pursuing a uniform effect

    Open Access•Hyeseung Koh•Analyses of Social Issues and…•2022

  • Public Conceptions of Scientific Consensus

    Open Access•Matthew H Slater, Joanna K Huxster et al.•Erkenntnis•2024

  • Effects of Competing Statistical and Testimonial Evidence in Debates About Science

    Sedona Chinn, Brian E Weeks•Environmental Communication•2021

  • Improving GM Consensus Acceptance Through Reduced Reactance and Climate Change-based Message Targeting

    A Hasell, Benjamin Lyons et al.•Environmental Communication•2020

  • The Role of Trust in Communicating Scientific Consensus and the Environmental Benefits of Genetically Engineered Crops

    Brianne Suldovsky, Heather Akin•Environmental Communication•2023

  • Open Questions in Scientific Consensus Messaging Research

    Asheley R Landrum, Matthew H Slater•Environmental Communication•2020

  • More Evidence of Psychological Reactance to Consensus Messaging

    Graham Dixon, Jay Hmielowski et al.•Environmental Communication•2023

  • The rise and fall of GMOs in politics

    Jakob Schwörer, Xavier Romero-Vidal et al.•Environmental Sociology•2022

  • Polarized U.S. publics, Pope Francis, and climate change

    Open Access•Asheley R Landrum, Rosalynn A Vasquez•Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews…•2020

  • Bettering Biotech Foods’ Foul Flavor

    Open Access•Christoph Klimmt, Nico Spreen•Science Communication•2024

  • Partisanship and anti-elite worldviews as correlates of science and health beliefs in the multi-party system of Spain

    Open Access•Anna Katharina Spälti, Benjamin Lyons et al.•Public Understanding of Science•2023

  • When experts matter

    Open Access•Benjamin Lyons, Vittorio Mérola et al.•Public Understanding of Science•2024

  • Scientific Disagreements, Fast Science and Higher-Order Evidence

    Open Access•D Friedman, Daniel C Friedman et al.•Philosophy of Science•2023

  • The gateway (mis)belief model

    Open Access•Hannah Timna Logemann, Jacob B Rode et al.•British Journal of Psychology•2025

  • Defining Misinformation and Understanding its Bounded Nature

    Emily K Vraga, Leticia Bode•Political Communication•2020

  • Correcting Misperceptions About Genetically Modified Food on Social Media

    Open Access•Leticia Bode, Emily K Vraga et al.•Science Communication•2021

  • Scaling up interactive argumentation by providing counterarguments with a chatbot

    Open Access•Sacha Altay, Marlène Schwartz et al.•Nature Human Behaviour•2022

  • Trust in Science and the Science of Trust

    Open Access•Friederike Hendriks, Dorothe Kienhues et al.•Trust and Communication in a…•2016

  • The Role of Trust in Knowledge

    John Hardwig•The Journal of Philosophy•1991

  • Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology

    Open Access•Dan M Kahan, Donald Braman et al.•Nature Nanotechnology•2009

  • A Widening Gap

    Riley E Dunlap, Araon M McCright•Environment Science and Policy…•2008

  • Beyond Counting Climate Consensus

    Open Access•Warren Pearce, Reiner Grundmann et al.•Environmental Communication•2017

  • What conceptions of science communication are espoused by science research funding bodies

    Open Access•Sarah Palmer, Sarah E Palmer et al.•Public Understanding of Science•2014

  • It’s not my consensus

    Open Access•Josh Pasek•Public Understanding of Science•2018

  • Religiosity as a perceptual filter

    Open Access•Dominique Brossard, Dietram A Scheufele et al.•Public Understanding of Science•2009

  • The Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming Matters

    Open Access•James L Powell•Bulletin of Science Technology &…•2016

  • The Division of Cognitive Labor

    Philip Kitcher•The Journal of Philosophy•1990

  • Science in Society

    Open Access•Patrick Sturgis, Nick Allum•Public Understanding of Science•2004

  • Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature

    Open Access•John Cook, Dana Nuccitelli et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2013

  • Highlighting consensus among medical scientists increases public support for vaccines

    Open Access•Sander Van Der Linden, Sander L van der Linden et al.•BMC Public Health•2015

  • A Measure of Perceived Argument Strength

    Xiaoquan Zhao, Andrew A Strasser et al.•Communication Methods and Measures•2011

  • Beyond the knowledge deficit

    Open Access•Janus Hansen, Lotte Holm et al.•Appetite•2003

  • Epistemic Landscapes and the Division of Cognitive Labor

    Open Access•Michael Weisberg, Ryan Muldoon•Philosophy of Science•2009

  • Climate‐Science Communication and the Measurement Problem

    Open Access•Dan M Kahan•Political Psychology•2015

  • Heightening Uncertainty Around Certain Science

    Open Access•Graham Dixon, Graham N Dixon et al.•Science Communication•2013

  • The case for motivated reasoning

    Ziva Kunda•Psychological Bulletin•1990

  • Public Enemy No. 1

    Open Access•Maxwell Boykoff, Maxwell T Boykoff•American Behavioral Scientist•2013

Obras citantes distintas21
Citações por ano3,5
Intervalo de citações2020 - 2025 (6)
Velocidade de citaçãorecent
Altamente citadoNão
Tipos de citaçãoNeutras: 21
Ethnos_APP • Projeto Open Source • Licença MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidade e Cookies • Documentação da API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código da API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código do Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae