Watch in slide show mode to observe (modest) animation. Download paper here .

Post on 23-Feb-2016

28 views 0 download

Tags:

description

Watch in slide show mode to observe (modest) animation. Download paper here . www.culturalcognition.net. A Two-Channel Strategy ( Model! ) of Science Communication. What am I talking about? . . . Cultural cognition & the Science Communication Problem Two-Channel Communication Strategy - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Watch in slide show mode to observe (modest) animation. Download paper here .

Watch in slide show mode to observe (modest) animation.

Download paper here.

www.culturalcognition.net

A Two-Channel Strategy (Model!) of Science Communication

Research Supported by: National Science Foundation, SES-0922714, - 0621840 & -0242106 Ruebhausen Fund, Yale Law School

Dan M. Kahan Yale University

& many many others!

1. Cultural cognition & the Science Communication Problem

2. Two-Channel Communication Strategy

3. Engaging the public, satisfying its appetite to know

What am I talking about? . . .

Hierarchy

Egalitarianism

Abortion procedure

Cultural Cognition of Risk

compulsory psychiatric treatment

Abortion procedure

compulsory psychiatric treatment

Risk Perception KeyLow RiskHigh Risk

Individualism Communitarianism

Environment: climate, nuclear

Guns/Gun Control

Guns/Gun Control

HPV Vaccination

HPV Vaccination

Gays military/gay parenting

Gays military/gay parenting

Environment: climate, nuclearhierarchical individualists hierarchical communitarians

egalitarian communitariansegalitarian individualists

Source: Kahan, D.M., Jenkins-Smith, H. & Braman, D. Cultural Cognition of Scientific Consensus. J. Risk Res. 14, 147-74 (2011).

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Bene

ifts >

Risk

s

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

Source: Kahan , Braman, Slovic, Gastil & Cohen Cultural Cognition of Nanotechnology Risks and Benefits, Nature Nanotechnology, 4(2), 87-91 (2009)

* Change across conditions significant at p < 0.05

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

Perc

eive

Ben

efits

> R

isks

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

No Information Information-Exposed

Bene

ifts >

Risk

s

Experiment Condition Experiment ConditionNo Info. No Info.Info.-Exposed

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

85%77%

61% 61%

Info.-Exposed

86%*

23%*

63%Unfamiliar with Nano

Familiar with Nano

Figure 1

EgalitarianCommunitarian

HierarchicalIndividualist

Ben

efits

> R

isks

Source: Kahan , Braman, Slovic, Gastil & Cohen Cultural Cognition of Nanotechnology Risks and Benefits, Nature Nanotechnology, 4(2), 87-91 (2009)

* Change across conditions significant at p < 0.05

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Perc

eive

Ben

efits

> R

isks

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”

U.S. general population survey, N = 1,500. Scale 0 (“no risk at all”) to 10 (“extreme risk”), M = 5.7, SD = 3.4. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.

-1. 00

-0. 75

-0. 50

-0. 25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low hig h

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-s

core

)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science Comprehension

Low High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z

-scor

e)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1 .00

-0 .75

-0 .50

-0 .25

0 .00

0 .25

0 .50

0 .75

1 .00

lo w hig h

Sample Overall

Higher science comprehension, lower risk perception

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”

U.S. general population survey, N = 1,500. Scale 0 (“no risk at all”) to 10 (“extreme risk”), M = 5.7, SD = 3.4. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.

-1. 00

-0. 75

-0. 50

-0. 25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low hig h

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-s

core

)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science Comprehension

Low High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z

-scor

e)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1 .00

-0 .75

-0 .50

-0 .25

0 .00

0 .25

0 .50

0 .75

1 .00

lo w hig h

Sample Overall

Higher science comprehension, lower risk perception

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”

U.S. general population survey, N = 1,500. Scale 0 (“no risk at all”) to 10 (“extreme risk”), M = 5.7, SD = 3.4. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.

-1. 00

-0. 75

-0. 50

-0. 25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low hig h

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-s

core

)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science Comprehension

Low High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z

-scor

e)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1 .00

-0 .75

-0 .50

-0 .25

0 .00

0 .25

0 .50

0 .75

1 .00

lo w hig h

Sample Overall

Higher science comprehension, lower risk perception

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”

U.S. general population survey, N = 1,500. Scale 0 (“no risk at all”) to 10 (“extreme risk”), M = 5.7, SD = 3.4. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.

-1. 00

-0. 75

-0. 50

-0. 25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low hig h

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-s

core

)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science Comprehension

Low High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z

-scor

e)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1 .00

-0 .75

-0 .50

-0 .25

0 .00

0 .25

0 .50

0 .75

1 .00

lo w hig h

Sample Overall

Higher science comprehension, lower risk perception

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”

U.S. general population survey, N = 1,500. Scale 0 (“no risk at all”) to 10 (“extreme risk”), M = 5.7, SD = 3.4. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.

-1. 00

-0. 75

-0. 50

-0. 25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low hig h

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-s

core

)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science Comprehension

Low High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z

-scor

e)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1 .00

-0 .75

-0 .50

-0 .25

0 .00

0 .25

0 .50

0 .75

1 .00

lo w hig h

Sample Overall

Higher science comprehension, lower risk perception

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”

U.S. general population survey, N = 1,500. Scale 0 (“no risk at all”) to 10 (“extreme risk”), M = 5.7, SD = 3.4. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.

-1. 00

-0. 75

-0. 50

-0. 25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low hig h

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-s

core

)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science Comprehension

Low High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z

-scor

e)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1 .00

-0 .75

-0 .50

-0 .25

0 .00

0 .25

0 .50

0 .75

1 .00

lo w hig h

Sample Overall

Higher science comprehension,

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”

U.S. general population survey, N = 1,500. Scale 0 (“no risk at all”) to 10 (“extreme risk”), M = 5.7, SD = 3.4. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.

-1. 00

-0. 75

-0. 50

-0. 25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low hig h

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-

scor

e) Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science ComprehensionLow High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z-s

core

)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Sample Overall

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

low high

Greater

Lesser

Science Comprehension

Low High

perc

eive

d ris

k (z

-scor

e)

Egalitarian Communitarian

Hierarchical Individualist

Actual Response

-1 .00

-0 .75

-0 .50

-0 .25

0 .00

0 .25

0 .50

0 .75

1 .00

lo w hig h

Sample Overall

Higher science comprehension, greater polarization

1. Cultural cognition & the Science Communication Problem

2. Two-Channel Communication Strategy

3. Engaging the public, satisfying its appetite to know

What am I talking about? . . .

RiskPerception

channel 1: content

Two Channel Communication Strategy

Information channel 2: meaning

4. Experimental response items

A. Evidence Skepticism Module

13. Convincing. We would like to know what you think of the Nature Science study, excerpts of which you just read. In your view, how convincing was the study on a scale of 0-10 with 0 meaning “completely unconvincing” to 10 meaning “completely convincing”?

Please indicate how strongly you disagree or agree with the following statements concerning the study. [Strongly disagree, moderately disagree, slightly disagree, slightly agree, moderately agree, strongly agree]

14. Biased. The scientists who did the study were biased. 15. Computers. Computer models like those relied on in the study are not a

reliable basis for predicting the impact of CO2 on the climate. 16. Moredata. More studies must be done before policymakers rely on the

findings of the Nature Science study.

study_dismiss scale (α = 0.85)

Hierarchy

Egalitarianism

Individualism

Climate change

Cultural Cognition Worldviews

Communitarianism

Climate change

Risk Perception KeyLow RiskHigh Risk

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

z_St

udy

dism

iss 2

Dismiss

Credit

Study dismissiveness

Hierarch IndividEgal Commun

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

anti-pollution

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

z_St

udy

dism

iss 2

Dismiss

Credit

Study dismissiveness

Hierarch IndividEgal Commun

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

anti-pollution

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

Control Condition

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

z_St

udy

dism

iss 2

Dismiss

Credit

Study dismissiveness

Hierarch IndividEgal Commun

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

anti-pollution

Anti-pollution Condition

Geoengineering Condition

4. Experimental response items

A. Evidence Skepticism Module

13. Convincing. We would like to know what you think of the Nature Science study, excerpts of which you just read. In your view, how convincing was the study on a scale of 0-10 with 0 meaning “completely unconvincing” to 10 meaning “completely convincing”?

Please indicate how strongly you disagree or agree with the following statements concerning the study. [Strongly disagree, moderately disagree, slightly disagree, slightly agree, moderately agree, strongly agree]

14. Biased. The scientists who did the study were biased. 15. Computers. Computer models like those relied on in the study are not a

reliable basis for predicting the impact of CO2 on the climate. 16. Moredata. More studies must be done before policymakers rely on the

findings of the Nature Science study.

study_dismiss scale (α = 0.85)

RiskPerception

channel 1: content

Two Channel Communication Strategy

Information channel 2: meaning

Anti-pollution Condition

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

z_St

udy

dism

iss 2

Dismiss

Credit

Study dismissiveness

Hierarch IndividEgal Commun

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

anti-pollution

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

z_St

udy

dism

iss 2

Dismiss

Credit

Study dismissiveness

Hierarch IndividEgal Commun

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

anti-pollution

Geoengineering Condition

RiskPerception

channel 1: content

Two Channel Communication Strategy

Information channel 2: meaning

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

z_St

udy

dism

iss 2

Dismiss

Credit

Study dismissiveness

Hierarch IndividEgal Commun

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

anti-pollution

-1.20-1.00-0.80-0.60-0.40-0.200.000.200.400.600.801.001.20

control pollution geoengineering

HI

EC

z_St

udy

dism

iss 2

Dismiss

Credit

Study dismissiveness

Hierarch IndividEgal Commun

anti-pollution

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

control pollution geoengineering

more polarization

lesspolarization

Polarizationz_

Stud

y di

smiss

2

anti-pollution

1. Cultural cognition & the Science Communication Problem

2. Two-Channel Communication Strategy

3. Engaging the public, satisfying its appetite to know

What am I talking about? . . .

RiskPerception

channel 1: content

Two Channel Communication Strategy

Information channel 2: meaning

1. Cultural cognition & the Science Communication Problem

2. Two-Channel Communication Strategy

3. Engaging the public, satisfying its appetite to know

What am I talking about? . . .