Weight-of-Evidence Strategies to Mitigate the Influence of Messages of Science Denialism in Public Discussions.
false-balance effect
forewarning
multiple-source effect
rebuttal
science denialism
vaccination
weight of evidence
Journal
Journal of cognition
ISSN: 2514-4820
Titre abrégé: J Cogn
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101732790
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Oct 2020
01 Oct 2020
Historique:
entrez:
12
10
2020
pubmed:
13
10
2020
medline:
13
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In mass media, the positions of science deniers and scientific-consensus advocates are repeatedly presented in a balanced manner. This false balance increases the spread of misinformation under the guise of objectivity. Weight-of-evidence strategies are an alternative, in which journalists lend weight to each position that is equivalent to the amount of evidence that supports the position. In public discussions, journalists can invite more advocates of scientific consensuses than science deniers (outnumbering) or they can employ warnings about the false-balance effect prior to the discussions (forewarning). In three pre-registered laboratory experiments, we tested the efficacy of outnumbering and forewarning as weight-of-evidence strategies to mitigate science deniers' influence on individuals' attitudes towards vaccination and their intention to vaccinate. We explored whether advocates' responses to science deniers (rebuttal) and audiences' issue involvement moderate the efficacy of these strategies. A total of
Identifiants
pubmed: 33043246
doi: 10.5334/joc.125
pmc: PMC7528676
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
36Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s).
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no competing interests to declare.
Références
Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):1149-60
pubmed: 19897823
Health Commun. 2015;30(5):461-72
pubmed: 25010352
PLoS One. 2017 May 5;12(5):e0175799
pubmed: 28475576
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2017 Jun;63:39-47
pubmed: 28629651
Am Psychol. 2017 Jul-Aug;72(5):459-473
pubmed: 28726454
Vaccine. 2018 Jan 4;36(2):196-198
pubmed: 27745953
Psychol Bull. 2003 Jan;129(1):119-38
pubmed: 12555796
Nat Commun. 2019 Aug 13;10(1):3502
pubmed: 31409789
Psychol Sci. 2020 Jul;31(7):770-780
pubmed: 32603243
PLoS One. 2018 Dec 7;13(12):e0208601
pubmed: 30532274
Nat Hum Behav. 2019 Sep;3(9):931-939
pubmed: 31235861
Health Educ Res. 2013 Apr;28(2):352-9
pubmed: 23193194
BMC Public Health. 2015 Dec 03;15:1207
pubmed: 26635296
Public Underst Sci. 2016 Nov;25(8):976-991
pubmed: 26657318
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Jun;100(6):983-98
pubmed: 21639651
J Health Commun. 2015;20(11):1302-9
pubmed: 26214547
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2016 Mar;22(1):24-38
pubmed: 26752513
Annu Rev Psychol. 2004;55:591-621
pubmed: 14744228
Eur J Public Health. 2009 Jan;19(1):2-4
pubmed: 19158101
Annu Rev Psychol. 2000;51:539-70
pubmed: 10751980