The effects of communicating uncertainty on public trust in facts and numbers

Uncertainty is inherent to our knowledge about the state of the world yet often not communicated alongside scientific facts and numbers. In the “posttruth” era where facts are increasingly contested, a common assumption is that communicating uncertainty will reduce public trust. However, a lack of s...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS 2020-04, Vol.117 (14), p.7672-7683
Hauptverfasser: van der Bles, Anne Marthe, van der Linden, Sander, Freeman, Alexandra L. J., Spiegelhalter, David J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 7683
container_issue 14
container_start_page 7672
container_title Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS
container_volume 117
creator van der Bles, Anne Marthe
van der Linden, Sander
Freeman, Alexandra L. J.
Spiegelhalter, David J.
description Uncertainty is inherent to our knowledge about the state of the world yet often not communicated alongside scientific facts and numbers. In the “posttruth” era where facts are increasingly contested, a common assumption is that communicating uncertainty will reduce public trust. However, a lack of systematic research makes it difficult to evaluate such claims. We conducted five experiments—including one preregistered replication with a national sample and one field experiment on the BBC News website (total n = 5,780)—to examine whether communicating epistemic uncertainty about facts across different topics (e.g., global warming, immigration), formats (verbal vs. numeric), and magnitudes (high vs. low) influences public trust. Results show that whereas people do perceive greater uncertainty when it is communicated, we observed only a small decrease in trust in numbers and trustworthiness of the source, and mostly for verbal uncertainty communication. These results could help reassure all communicators of facts and science that they can be more open and transparent about the limits of human knowledge.
doi_str_mv 10.1073/pnas.1913678117
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7149229</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26929711</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26929711</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-c1e895d55e2f78f4e6c4f27ed1ad25a6be8de3d4b8f2898a2c6f352119b4ae613</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkM9LHDEUx0Ox1NX23FNLoOfRvCQzSS6CSKsFSy_2HDKZF51lJ9kmmYL_vbOsbvX0Dt8f78uHkM_AzoApcb6NrpyBAdEpDaDekRUwA00nDTsiK8a4arTk8piclLJmjJlWsw_kWHDOWin0ivy6e0CKIaCvhaZAfZqmOY7e1THe0zl6zNWNsT7SFOl27jejpzXPpdIx0uB2KRcHGuepx1w-kvfBbQp-er6n5M-P73dXN83t7-ufV5e3jW-ZqY0H1KYd2hZ5UDpI7LwMXOEAbuCt63rUA4pB9jpwbbTjvgui5QCmlw47EKfkYt-7LJpw8Bhrdhu7zePk8qNNbrRvlTg-2Pv0zyqQhnOzFHx7Lsjp74yl2nWac1w2Wy60UbwDtXtzvnf5nErJGA4fgNkdf7vjb__zXxJfXw87-F-AL4Yve8O61JQPOu8MNwpAPAHSDIz5</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2389726171</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The effects of communicating uncertainty on public trust in facts and numbers</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>van der Bles, Anne Marthe ; van der Linden, Sander ; Freeman, Alexandra L. J. ; Spiegelhalter, David J.</creator><creatorcontrib>van der Bles, Anne Marthe ; van der Linden, Sander ; Freeman, Alexandra L. J. ; Spiegelhalter, David J.</creatorcontrib><description>Uncertainty is inherent to our knowledge about the state of the world yet often not communicated alongside scientific facts and numbers. In the “posttruth” era where facts are increasingly contested, a common assumption is that communicating uncertainty will reduce public trust. However, a lack of systematic research makes it difficult to evaluate such claims. We conducted five experiments—including one preregistered replication with a national sample and one field experiment on the BBC News website (total n = 5,780)—to examine whether communicating epistemic uncertainty about facts across different topics (e.g., global warming, immigration), formats (verbal vs. numeric), and magnitudes (high vs. low) influences public trust. Results show that whereas people do perceive greater uncertainty when it is communicated, we observed only a small decrease in trust in numbers and trustworthiness of the source, and mostly for verbal uncertainty communication. These results could help reassure all communicators of facts and science that they can be more open and transparent about the limits of human knowledge.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0027-8424</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1091-6490</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1913678117</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32205438</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: National Academy of Sciences</publisher><subject>Climate change ; Communication ; Global warming ; Humans ; Immigration ; Internet ; Meta-Analysis as Topic ; Social Sciences ; Trust ; Trustworthiness ; Uncertainty ; Websites</subject><ispartof>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS, 2020-04, Vol.117 (14), p.7672-7683</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2020 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.</rights><rights>Copyright National Academy of Sciences Apr 7, 2020</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 the Author(s). Published by PNAS. 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-c1e895d55e2f78f4e6c4f27ed1ad25a6be8de3d4b8f2898a2c6f352119b4ae613</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-c1e895d55e2f78f4e6c4f27ed1ad25a6be8de3d4b8f2898a2c6f352119b4ae613</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0269-1744 ; 0000-0001-9350-6745 ; 0000-0002-7953-9425 ; 0000-0002-4115-161X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26929711$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26929711$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,803,885,27924,27925,53791,53793,58017,58250</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32205438$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>van der Bles, Anne Marthe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Linden, Sander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freeman, Alexandra L. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spiegelhalter, David J.</creatorcontrib><title>The effects of communicating uncertainty on public trust in facts and numbers</title><title>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS</title><addtitle>Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A</addtitle><description>Uncertainty is inherent to our knowledge about the state of the world yet often not communicated alongside scientific facts and numbers. In the “posttruth” era where facts are increasingly contested, a common assumption is that communicating uncertainty will reduce public trust. However, a lack of systematic research makes it difficult to evaluate such claims. We conducted five experiments—including one preregistered replication with a national sample and one field experiment on the BBC News website (total n = 5,780)—to examine whether communicating epistemic uncertainty about facts across different topics (e.g., global warming, immigration), formats (verbal vs. numeric), and magnitudes (high vs. low) influences public trust. Results show that whereas people do perceive greater uncertainty when it is communicated, we observed only a small decrease in trust in numbers and trustworthiness of the source, and mostly for verbal uncertainty communication. These results could help reassure all communicators of facts and science that they can be more open and transparent about the limits of human knowledge.</description><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Global warming</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immigration</subject><subject>Internet</subject><subject>Meta-Analysis as Topic</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Trust</subject><subject>Trustworthiness</subject><subject>Uncertainty</subject><subject>Websites</subject><issn>0027-8424</issn><issn>1091-6490</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkM9LHDEUx0Ox1NX23FNLoOfRvCQzSS6CSKsFSy_2HDKZF51lJ9kmmYL_vbOsbvX0Dt8f78uHkM_AzoApcb6NrpyBAdEpDaDekRUwA00nDTsiK8a4arTk8piclLJmjJlWsw_kWHDOWin0ivy6e0CKIaCvhaZAfZqmOY7e1THe0zl6zNWNsT7SFOl27jejpzXPpdIx0uB2KRcHGuepx1w-kvfBbQp-er6n5M-P73dXN83t7-ufV5e3jW-ZqY0H1KYd2hZ5UDpI7LwMXOEAbuCt63rUA4pB9jpwbbTjvgui5QCmlw47EKfkYt-7LJpw8Bhrdhu7zePk8qNNbrRvlTg-2Pv0zyqQhnOzFHx7Lsjp74yl2nWac1w2Wy60UbwDtXtzvnf5nErJGA4fgNkdf7vjb__zXxJfXw87-F-AL4Yve8O61JQPOu8MNwpAPAHSDIz5</recordid><startdate>20200407</startdate><enddate>20200407</enddate><creator>van der Bles, Anne Marthe</creator><creator>van der Linden, Sander</creator><creator>Freeman, Alexandra L. J.</creator><creator>Spiegelhalter, David J.</creator><general>National Academy of Sciences</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0269-1744</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9350-6745</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7953-9425</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4115-161X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200407</creationdate><title>The effects of communicating uncertainty on public trust in facts and numbers</title><author>van der Bles, Anne Marthe ; van der Linden, Sander ; Freeman, Alexandra L. J. ; Spiegelhalter, David J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-c1e895d55e2f78f4e6c4f27ed1ad25a6be8de3d4b8f2898a2c6f352119b4ae613</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Global warming</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immigration</topic><topic>Internet</topic><topic>Meta-Analysis as Topic</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Trust</topic><topic>Trustworthiness</topic><topic>Uncertainty</topic><topic>Websites</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>van der Bles, Anne Marthe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Linden, Sander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freeman, Alexandra L. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spiegelhalter, David J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>van der Bles, Anne Marthe</au><au>van der Linden, Sander</au><au>Freeman, Alexandra L. J.</au><au>Spiegelhalter, David J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The effects of communicating uncertainty on public trust in facts and numbers</atitle><jtitle>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS</jtitle><addtitle>Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A</addtitle><date>2020-04-07</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>117</volume><issue>14</issue><spage>7672</spage><epage>7683</epage><pages>7672-7683</pages><issn>0027-8424</issn><eissn>1091-6490</eissn><abstract>Uncertainty is inherent to our knowledge about the state of the world yet often not communicated alongside scientific facts and numbers. In the “posttruth” era where facts are increasingly contested, a common assumption is that communicating uncertainty will reduce public trust. However, a lack of systematic research makes it difficult to evaluate such claims. We conducted five experiments—including one preregistered replication with a national sample and one field experiment on the BBC News website (total n = 5,780)—to examine whether communicating epistemic uncertainty about facts across different topics (e.g., global warming, immigration), formats (verbal vs. numeric), and magnitudes (high vs. low) influences public trust. Results show that whereas people do perceive greater uncertainty when it is communicated, we observed only a small decrease in trust in numbers and trustworthiness of the source, and mostly for verbal uncertainty communication. These results could help reassure all communicators of facts and science that they can be more open and transparent about the limits of human knowledge.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>National Academy of Sciences</pub><pmid>32205438</pmid><doi>10.1073/pnas.1913678117</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0269-1744</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9350-6745</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7953-9425</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4115-161X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0027-8424
ispartof Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS, 2020-04, Vol.117 (14), p.7672-7683
issn 0027-8424
1091-6490
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7149229
source MEDLINE; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Climate change
Communication
Global warming
Humans
Immigration
Internet
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Social Sciences
Trust
Trustworthiness
Uncertainty
Websites
title The effects of communicating uncertainty on public trust in facts and numbers
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T18%3A19%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20effects%20of%20communicating%20uncertainty%20on%20public%20trust%20in%20facts%20and%20numbers&rft.jtitle=Proceedings%20of%20the%20National%20Academy%20of%20Sciences%20-%20PNAS&rft.au=van%20der%20Bles,%20Anne%20Marthe&rft.date=2020-04-07&rft.volume=117&rft.issue=14&rft.spage=7672&rft.epage=7683&rft.pages=7672-7683&rft.issn=0027-8424&rft.eissn=1091-6490&rft_id=info:doi/10.1073/pnas.1913678117&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E26929711%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2389726171&rft_id=info:pmid/32205438&rft_jstor_id=26929711&rfr_iscdi=true