Volume 41, Issue 3 - Special Issue: Scientific uncertainty in public discourse

Although uncertainty is inherent in scientific research, it is an often neglected topic in public communication. In this article, we analyze how scientists and journalists think they should communicate about the uncertainty of scientific evidence in public, and whether their real-world communication meets laypersons’ demands and expectations. For scientists and journalists, our analyses are based theoretically on an expectancy-value model and empirically on two representative surveys. Laypersons’ expectations and evaluations are analyzed using qualitative in-depth interviews. Results show that scientists and journalists widely agree that scientific uncertainty should be pointed out in their communication. Nonetheless, while scientists show a clear inclination toward the media and hope that uncertainties will not be dramatized or misused, journalists on the other hand have a strong audience orientation and hope to stimulate critical reflection on scientific findings. For audiences, however, media coverage about scientific uncertainty is of less interest. They clearly expect fact-oriented information on the use of technology in everyday life.

This article uses quantitative content analysis data from June 1, 2012 to May 31, 2013 to examine the salience and construction of scientific uncertainty about climate change in German and British press coverage using quantitative content analysis data from June 1, 2012 to May 31, 2013. The results show that uncertainty about climate change − against overwhelming consensus among climate scientists − is prominent in the press coverage of both countries. The findings indicate that it is important to distinguish whether scientific uncertainty can be found at the level of single articles, or at the level of the coverage as a whole. The study also reveals that uncertainty is constructed differently in German and British press coverage in terms of the media’s framing of climate science and the types of actors who are involved in the construction of scientific uncertainty.

Uncertainty is intrinsic to science, to knowledge acquisition and risk assessment. When communicating about climate change, however, uncertainty can be used and understood as ‘not knowing’, that is, as ignorance. In this article we aim to understand how ‘uncertainty’ is used in a specific cultural and media context at two important periods in time. Using a corpus linguistic approach, we examine how ‘uncertainty’ was used in the context of UK press coverage of climate change in 2010 (following ‘Climategate’) and in 2014−15, after the latest IPCC report had been published. We find that after Climategate and the (failed) Copenhagen summit, ‘uncertainty’ was used to question the authority and credibility of climate science; after the latest IPCC report and in the run-up to the (more successful) Paris summit, discussions focused on uncertainties inherent in various climate change mitigation activities and associated with the economy, environment and politics more generally.

This paper argues the relevance of the internet for scientific communication. It is not only an immense source of information, it also empowers laypeople to interact by commenting, rating, and sharing online content. Previous studies have found that users’ contributions to online content affect the reception processes. However, research on who actually uses these participatory possibilities is scarce. This paper characterizes engaged (and non-engaged) online users by analyzing online engagement (using search engines and different participatory forms) with a representative German online survey ( n = 1,463). Different groups of climate change perceptions (such as uncertainty of scientific evidence), attitudes, knowledge, and online engagement are identified with hierarchical cluster analyses. Interest and knowledge are main drivers of online engagement, although a group of uninterested, unknowing and doubtful users participates in SNSs. The most active group, participating experts, knows most about scientific processes in climate sciences. No distinct group of skeptical participants was identified.

When laypersons are interested in science-related questions, they frequently visit participatory websites such as science blogs. Typically, articles on these sites are accompanied by user comments or ratings. The present research investigated the effects of different forms of user feedback on readers’ interpretation of science topics. In two experiments ( N = 178), participants read a one-sided blog article about the dangers of violent video games. The visible user reactions contradicted the slant of the article and were systematically varied (argumentative comments vs. subjective comments vs. ratings vs. none). Results of Study 1 showed that parents (for whom the topic is relevant) made use of comments and ratings to infer the opinion climate, while there were only limited effects on readers’ attitudes. Less involved readers (student participants in Study 2), in contrast, were susceptible to the persuasive influence of user comments. Implications regarding the role of user reactions in online science communication are discussed.