Threatening experts: Correlates of viewing scientists as a social threat.

Despite widespread trust in scientists, efforts to curtail their influence suggest some Americans distrust scientists and may even perceive them to be a social threat. Using panel survey data, we examine who holds this viewpoint and potential implications of threat perceptions. Results suggest Republicans and Evangelical identifying individuals perceived more social threat from scientists. News media uses were associated with threat perceptions in divergent ways. Threat perceptions were strongly associated with inaccurate science beliefs, support for excluding scientists from policy-making, and retributive actions toward scientists. Findings highlight the importance of social identity considerations amid concerns about partisan social sorting and politicization of science.

How Different Uses of Social Media Inform Perceptions of Offline Social Norms and Changes in Vaccine Intentions.

As the boundaries between our online and offline lives are increasingly blurred, it is important to attend to the ways in which online behaviors shape our offline perceptions and actions. While a great deal of health communication research has examined the effects of exposure to specific social media content, it is also important to investigate how broader patterns of everyday social media use may affect perceptions of health norms and behaviors in different ways. In this panel survey, we explored how using social media for informational, connection, and aspirational purposes affected perceptions of COVID-19 vaccination norms and changes in vaccine intentions between December 2020 and March 2021 in the US Using social media to seek information and to connect with others positively influenced vaccine intentions via strengthening perceptions of offline social norms supporting vaccination. These findings highlight how social media use is integrated with and informs our offline lives, as well as the important role apolitical social media use plays in shaping attitudes toward politicized science.

Effects of consensus messages and political ideology on climate change attitudes: inconsistent findings and the effect of a pretest.

There are inconsistent findings concerning the efficacy of consensus messages to persuade individuals to hold scientifically supported positions on climate change. In this experiment, we tested the impact of consensus messages on skeptics' climate beliefs and attitudes and investigated how the decision to pretest initial climate beliefs and attitudes prior to consensus message exposure may influence results. We found that although consensus messages led individuals to report higher scientific agreement estimates, total effects on key variables were likely an artifact of study design; consensus messages only affected climate attitudes and beliefs when they were measured both before and after message exposure. In the absence of a pretest, we did not observe significant total effects of consensus messages on climate outcomes. These results highlight the limitations of consensus messaging strategies at reducing political polarization and the importance of experimental designs that mimic real-world contexts. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10584-021-03200-2.

Politicization and Polarization in COVID-19 News Coverage.

This study examines the level of politicization and polarization in COVID-19 news in U.S. newspapers and televised network news from March to May 2020. Using multiple computer-assisted content analytic approaches, we find that newspaper coverage is highly politicized, network news coverage somewhat less so, and both newspaper and network news coverage are highly polarized. We find that politicians appear in newspaper coverage more frequently than scientists, whereas politicians and scientists are more equally featured in network news. We suggest that the high degree of politicization and polarization in initial COVID-19 coverage may have contributed to polarization in U.S. COVID-19 attitudes.

In consensus we trust? Persuasive effects of scientific consensus communication.

Scholars have recently suggested that communicating levels of scientific consensus (e.g. the percentage of scientists who agree about human-caused climate change) can shift public opinion toward the dominant scientific opinion. Initial research suggested that consensus communication effectively reduces public skepticism. However, other research failed to find a persuasive effect for those with conflicting prior beliefs. This study enters this contested space by experimentally testing how different levels of consensus shape perceptions of scientific certainty. We further examine how perceptions of certainty influence personal agreement and policy support. Findings indicate that communicating higher levels of consensus increases perceptions of scientific certainty, which is associated with greater personal agreement and policy support for non-political issues. We find some suggestive evidence that this mediated effect is moderated by participants' overall trust in science, such that those with low trust in science fail to perceive higher agreement as indicative of greater scientific certainty.

The elusive power of the individual victim: Failure to find a difference in the effectiveness of charitable appeals focused on one compared to many victims.

Previous research has offered conflicting findings regarding the influence of help appeals that feature an individual victim compared to a group of victims. Studies examining emotional responses and donation behavior have generally found that help appeals focusing on a single victim elicit more prosocial responses, while studies examining policy support have found the opposite. The present studies investigate these effects while addressing potential confounds that may have arisen in previous research. Study 1 (N = 924) compares the effects of help appeals that focus on either a) an identified individual, b) an identified group, c) statistics describing many individuals, or d) statistics paired with an individual. Study 1 also examines how the location of the individual(s) in need moderates observed effects. Study 2 (N = 1,085) compares the effects of help appeals that describe either an identified individual or statistics about many individuals, while fully crossing the text manipulation with either a) no imagery, b) an image of an individual, or c) a map indicating areas of poverty. In both Study 1 and Study 2 no significant differences were found between the individual and the group conditions.