Understanding public preferences for learning about uncertain science: measurement and individual difference correlates

IF 1.5 Q2 COMMUNICATION Frontiers in Communication Pub Date : 2023-12-08 DOI:10.3389/fcomm.2023.1245786
Chelsea L. Ratcliff, Blue Harvill, Rebekah Wicke
{"title":"Understanding public preferences for learning about uncertain science: measurement and individual difference correlates","authors":"Chelsea L. Ratcliff, Blue Harvill, Rebekah Wicke","doi":"10.3389/fcomm.2023.1245786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although uncertainty is inherent in science, public audiences vary in their openness to information about preliminary discoveries and the caveats and limitations of research. These preferences shape responses to science communication, and science communicators often adapt messaging based on assumed preferences. However, there has not been a validated instrument for examining these preferences. Here, we present an instrument to capture preferences for information about uncertainty in science, validated with a large U.S. adult sample. Factor analysis results show that preferring certain scientific information and preferring uncertain scientific information are orthogonal constructs requiring separate measures. The final Preference for Information about Uncertain Science (or “PIUS-11”) scale comprises two dimensions: preferring complete information (i.e., caveats, limitations, and hedging included) and being open to learning about preliminary science. The final Preference for Certain Science Information (or “PCSI-9”) scale comprises two dimensions: preferring streamlined information (i.e., caveats, limitations, and hedging removed) and preferring to learn only about established science. We present psychometric properties of each scale and report observed relationships between each set of preferences and an individual's scientific understanding, trust in science, need for cognitive closure, and sociodemographic factors.","PeriodicalId":31739,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Communication","volume":"53 51","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1245786","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although uncertainty is inherent in science, public audiences vary in their openness to information about preliminary discoveries and the caveats and limitations of research. These preferences shape responses to science communication, and science communicators often adapt messaging based on assumed preferences. However, there has not been a validated instrument for examining these preferences. Here, we present an instrument to capture preferences for information about uncertainty in science, validated with a large U.S. adult sample. Factor analysis results show that preferring certain scientific information and preferring uncertain scientific information are orthogonal constructs requiring separate measures. The final Preference for Information about Uncertain Science (or “PIUS-11”) scale comprises two dimensions: preferring complete information (i.e., caveats, limitations, and hedging included) and being open to learning about preliminary science. The final Preference for Certain Science Information (or “PCSI-9”) scale comprises two dimensions: preferring streamlined information (i.e., caveats, limitations, and hedging removed) and preferring to learn only about established science. We present psychometric properties of each scale and report observed relationships between each set of preferences and an individual's scientific understanding, trust in science, need for cognitive closure, and sociodemographic factors.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
了解公众对学习不确定科学的偏好:测量与个体差异的相关性
虽然不确定性是科学固有的,但公众对初步发现以及研究的警告和局限性的信息的开放程度各不相同。这些偏好塑造了对科学传播的反应,而科学传播者经常根据假设的偏好来调整信息传递。然而,还没有一个有效的工具来检查这些偏好。在这里,我们提出了一种工具来捕捉对科学中不确定性信息的偏好,并通过大量美国成年人样本进行了验证。因子分析结果表明,偏好确定的科学信息和偏好不确定的科学信息是需要单独测量的正交结构。对不确定科学信息的最终偏好(或“PIUS-11”)量表包括两个维度:偏好完整的信息(即,包括警告、限制和对冲),以及对初步科学的学习持开放态度。对某些科学信息的最终偏好(或“PCSI-9”)量表包括两个维度:更喜欢精简的信息(即,警告,限制和对冲删除),更喜欢只学习已建立的科学。我们展示了每个量表的心理测量特性,并报告了观察到的每组偏好与个人的科学理解、对科学的信任、认知封闭需求和社会人口因素之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
284
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Causal inference of diachronic semantic maps from cross-linguistic synchronic polysemy data I'd rather be a cyborg than a celebrity: Black feminism in the digital music industry Feminist HCI and narratives of design semantics in DIY music hardware Designing understandable, action-oriented, and well-perceived earthquake risk maps—The Swiss case study Topic modeling three decades of climate change news in Denmark
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1