What is it about?
We experimentally measure and compare the credibility that citizens attribute to scientific information on the evolution of CO2 emissions disclosed by different institutional sources (business associations, government, non-government environmental organisations, international bodies and national research institutions).
Featured Image
Photo by Bob Blob on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Because the research design (survey experiment or national representative factorial survey with high level of internal and external validity. The robust findings show that an institutional credibility gap exists in science communication (in Spain) and we also investigate the factors accounting for the credibility of the different institutional sources by examining variables related to knowledge, interest, trust, reputation, deference, attitudes, values and personal characteristics.
Perspectives
Findings raise question regarding the Government and Business science communcation strategies, their need to become associated to academics and researchers, but they also raise ethical and responsive research issues at reserch institutions to tackle the risks of collaborations with special interest.
Luis Sanz-Menendez
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas CSIC -Institute of Public Goods and Policies
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: The credibility of scientific communication sources regarding climate change: A population-based survey experiment, Public Understanding of Science, April 2019, SAGE Publications,
DOI: 10.1177/0963662519840946.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
