Testing risk communication strategies designed to address cognitive simplifications that underlie factually erroneous beliefs about scientific issues

在有效传播科学方面仍有许多东西有待学习。人们在处理复杂的信息时，往往为了理解信息而将其简化，为了促进这一过程，简化在几乎所有的科学交流中都必不可少。然而，简化的确切形式是关键，特别是有争议的问题。这是因为一些简化可能会混淆人们，甚至被利用来故意误导他们。该项目测试了旨在解决认知简化的风险沟通策略，这些认知简化是在这种误解可能导致次优意图和决策的情况下对科学问题的事实错误信念的基础。该研究还测试了明确承认科学不确定性对所提供信息的信任的影响。先前的研究表明，夸大科学的确定性可能会招致怀疑。 总之，该项目将有助于更好地了解普通受众如何看待复杂的科学问题和不确定性，以及根据这些原则制定风险沟通战略。该项目将确定科学教育工作者和风险传播者可以采取的战略，以帮助受众了解危及关键科学要素的复杂风险。成功的科学和风险沟通关键取决于首先了解人们如何处理复杂的信息。当人们思考复杂的科学问题时，他们倾向于使用捷径，更容易接受与自己先前信念一致的信息。 以认知原则为指导的沟通策略可以最大限度地减少人类信息处理系统的弱点，并利用其优势。该项目将开发和测试针对已知简化的沟通策略，这些简化往往会减少处理负荷，但也可能导致误解，从而降低风险的严重性和紧迫性。因为人们可能不知道他们的理解所基于的假设，提供解释说明这些步骤可能会让非专家对问题有一个公正和更全面的理解。因此，他们可能会更好地理解经科学评估的问题的严重性，并更好地确定有效的缓解行动。 这些假设将在全国代表性样本上进行测试，实验系统地检查有针对性的沟通策略对信任、个人推理、心理模型、态度、情感和决策的影响程度，控制之前确定的与科学相关的关键因素导向的态度，包括政治意识形态、年龄、种族和民族。本文提出的认知实验方法是新颖的，将对风险沟通心理学以及高阶认知（例如，该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Much remains to be learned about communicating science effectively. When people process complex information, they often simplify it in order to understand it. To facilitate this process, simplification is necessary in almost all science communication. However, the exact form of simplification is key, especially with controversial issues.. This is because some simplifications may confuse people, or even be exploited to intentionally mislead them. This project tests risk communication strategies designed to address the cognitive simplifications that underlie factually erroneous beliefs about scientific issues in situations where such misunderstandings may be likely to lead to suboptimal intentions and decisions. The research also tests the effects of explicitly acknowledging scientific uncertainty on trust in the information provided. Previous research shows that overstating the certainty of the science may invite skepticism. In sum, this project will contribute to a better understanding of how lay audiences think about complex scientific issues and uncertainty as well as to the development of risk communication strategies based on those principles. The project will identify strategies that can be adopted by science educators and risk communicators to help audiences to understand complex risks that subsume critical science elements. Successful science and risk communication depend critically on first understanding how people process complex information. When people think about complex scientific issues, they tend to use shortcuts and more readily accept information consistent with their own prior beliefs. Communication strategies that are guided by cognitive principles can minimize the weaknesses and capitalize on the strengths of the human information processing system. This project will develop and test communication strategies targeting known simplifications that tend to reduce processing load, but also can lead to misunderstandings that reduce the perceived seriousness and urgency of the risk. Because people may not be aware of the assumptions upon which their understanding is based, providing explanations illuminating those steps may allow non-experts to achieve an unbiased and better-rounded understanding of the issue. As a result, they may come to better appreciate the scientifically-assessed seriousness of the problem and to better identify effective mitigative actions. These hypotheses will be tested on nationally representative samples, in experiments that systematically examine the extent to which targeted communication strategies influence trust, individual reasoning, mental models, attitudes, emotions, and decisions, controlling for key factors previously identified as being associated with science-oriented attitudes, including political ideology, age, race and ethnicity. The cognitive experimental approach proposed here is novel and will make important contributions to the psychology of risk communication, as well as to the study of higher order cognition (e.g., decision making) by applying interventions based on dual process theories and mental model constructs.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.