The Power of Stories: Narratives and Information Framing Effects in Science Communication

Yang Yang; Jill E. Hobbs

doi:10.1002/ajae.12078

The Power of Stories: Narratives and Information Framing Effects in Science Communication

American Journal of Agricultural Economics ◽

10.1002/ajae.12078 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 102 (4) ◽

pp. 1271-1296 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Yang Yang ◽

Jill E. Hobbs

Keyword(s):

Science Communication ◽

Framing Effects ◽

Information Framing

Download Full-text

The (im-)moral scientist? Measurement and framing effects shape the association between scientists and immorality

10.31234/osf.io/wzvy7 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Bastiaan T Rutjens ◽

Esther Niehoff ◽

Steven Heine

Keyword(s):

Science Communication ◽

Framing Effects ◽

Moral Foundations ◽

Immoral Behavior ◽

Positive Attitudes ◽

The People ◽

Different Types ◽

Measurement Effects ◽

Practical Implications ◽

Successful Science

Recent years have not only seen growing public distrust in science, but also in the people conducting science. Yet, attitudes toward scientists remain largely unexplored, and the limited body of literature that exists points to an interesting ambivalence. While survey data suggest scientists to be highly respected, research has found scientists to be perceived as capable of immoral behavior. We report two experiments aimed at identifying what contributes to this ambivalence through systematic investigations of stereotypical perceptions of scientists. In these studies, we particularly focus on two potential sources of inconsistencies in previous work: divergent operationalizations of morality (measurement effects), and different specifications of the broad group of scientists (framing effects). Results show that scientists are generally perceived as more likely to violate binding as opposed to individualizing moral foundations, and that they deviate from control groups more strongly on the latter. The extent to which different morality measures reflect the differentiation between binding and individualizing moral foundations at least partially accounts for previous contradictory findings. Moreover, the results indicate large variation in perceptions of different types of scientists: People hold more positive attitudes toward university-affiliated scientists as compared to industry-affiliated scientists, with perceptions of the ‘typical scientist’ more closely resembling the latter. Taken together, the findings have important academic ramifications for science skepticism, morality, and stereotyping research as well as valuable practical implications for successful science communication.

Download Full-text