Work

Controversy matters: Impacts of topic and solution controversy on the perceived credibility of a scientist who advocates

Year: 2017

Type: article

Abstract: In this article, we focus on the potential influence of a scientist's advocacy position on the public's perceived credibility of scientists as a whole. Further, we examine how the scientist's solution position (information only, non-controversial, and controversial) affects the public's perception of the scientist's motivation for sharing information about specific issues (flu, marijuana, climate change, severe weather). Finally, we assess how perceived motivations mediate the relationship between solution position and credibility. Using data from a quota sample of American adults obtained by Qualtrics (n = 2,453), we found that in some conditions advocating for a solution positively predicted credibility, while in one condition, it negatively predicted scientist credibility. We also found that the influence of solution position on perceived credibility was mediated by several motivation perceptions; most notably through perception that the scientist was motivated to: (a) serve the public and (b) persuade the public. Further results and implications are discussed.

Source: PLoS ONE

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187511

Authors: Lindsey Beall, Teresa A. Myers, John E. Kotcher, Emily K. Vraga, Edward W. Maibach

Institution: George Mason University

Language: English

Topic: Climate Change Communication and Perception

Subfield: Sociology and Political Science

Field: Social Sciences

Domain: Social Sciences

Open Access status: gold

Estimated APC paid: $2,382

Funder: National Aeronautics and Space Administration