Public debates driven by incomplete scientific data: The cases of evolution theory, global warming and H1N1 pandemic influenza
Public debates driven by incomplete scientific data: The cases of evolution theory, global warming and H1N1 pandemic influenza
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.physa.2010.04.039
复制
发表时间：
2010-09-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Galam, Serge
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Galam, Serge
研究了由不完整的科学数据驱动的公共辩论，由于目前的科学知识状况，没有人能声称绝对确定。对进化论、全球变暖和H1N1大流行流感的案例进行了研究。前两个问题具有争议性影响，而第三个问题则更加中立和得到解决。基于明确但不确定的数据采取谨慎、平衡的态度似乎是一种失败的策略。相比之下，夸大论据和不正确的主张似乎是必要的，但不足以最终引发一场公开辩论，这些主张无法用科学的方法加以驳斥。这些令人困惑和不幸的结论的潜在关键机制是使用意见动力学的Galam序贯概率模型(Galam，2002[4]，Galam，2005[18]，Galam and Jacobs，2007[19])确定的。它揭示了僵化主体的存在及其各自的比例是决定公开辩论中不完整科学数据的信任度的工具参数。按照自己不灵活的比例行事会修改流程图的拓扑结构，这反过来又会产生不相关的初始支撑。相反，考虑到一些拓扑结构，专注于思想开放的代理人可能是无用的。当证据不像声称的那样有力时，人们发现推动民众意见的是不可改变的因素，而不是数据。这一结果为设计适当的战略以赢得公众辩论提供了一个新的但令人不安的线索。(C)2010爱思唯尔B.V.保留所有权利。
Public debates driven by incomplete scientific data where nobody can claim absolute certainty, due to the current state of scientific knowledge, are studied. The cases of evolution theory, global warming and H1N1 pandemic influenza are investigated. The first two are of controversial impact while the third is more neutral and resolved. To adopt a cautious balanced attitude based on clear but inconclusive data appears to be a lose-out strategy. In contrast overstating arguments with incorrect claims which cannot be scientifically refuted appears to be necessary but not sufficient to eventually Will a public debate. The underlying key mechanisms of these puzzling and unfortunate conclusions are identified using the Galam sequential probabilistic model of opinion dynamics (Galam, 2002 [4], Galam, 2005 [18], Galam and Jacobs, 2007 [19]). It reveals that the existence of inflexible agents and their respective proportions are the instrumental parameters to determine the faith of incomplete scientific data in public debates. Acting on one's own inflexible proportion modifies the topology of the flow diagram, which in turn can make irrelevant initial supports. On the contrary focusing on open-minded agents may be useless given some topologies. When the evidence is not as strong as claimed, the inflexibles rather than the data are found to drive the opinion of the population. The results shed a new but disturbing light on designing adequate strategies to win a public debate. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.