Many STEM scientists have received communication training to better engage the public on complex and controversial science, yet there often remains a disconnect between scientists’ findings and public perceptions on these topics. An interdisciplinary team of Iowa State University researchers hopes to bridge that gap.
Michael Scott Smith Science framing of rhino horn in Vietnam: credibility issues with framing traditional medicine as superstition. According to Milliken and Shaw (2012) a surge in rhino poaching in South Africa was linked to increasing demand for rhino horn in Vietnam for medical and status symbol purposes. To reduce demand, ENGOs in Vietnam communicated … Continue reading 2018 Authors and Abstracts
Trust and credibility are two critical heuristics that the public uses to interpret, evaluate and make decisions about complex, uncertain and controversial scientific information (Brossard and Nisbet, 2007; Pornpitakpan, 2004). Previous scholars have defined credibility as a multi-item construct that emerges from some combination of the audience’s perceptions of the source’s “trustworthiness” (character, honesty, believability) (McCroskey & Teven, 1999), “expertise” (qualifications, intelligence, authority, knowledge), and “goodwill” (caring, responsiveness, concern, empathy) (Teven, 2008). Though previous studies have described the importance of trust and credibility across several contexts, knowledge about these topics is widely dispersed across multiple fields, each with different definitions, measures and theoretical frameworks (National Academies of Sciences, 2016).
Submission deadline: **January 29, 2018**