Investigating uncertainty communication in science journalism

This dissertation set out to investigate three facets of scientific uncertainty communication: the ethical context it inhabits (given the prevalent weaponization of uncertainty against the science of which it is a part), how an example of it is perceived in a focus group setting, and how that example corresponds to ratings of the communicator’s trustworthiness in a survey-experiment setting. Each facet called for a different method; Chapter III takes the form of a philosophical essay probing the literature on the subject; Chapter IV details the focus group study, in which participants read uncertainty-emphasizing and uncertainty-deemphasizing excerpts of neuroimaging journalism, then discussed them; and Chapter V takes shape as a survey-experiment randomly assigning participants to read one of the two excerpts and complete measures gauging their perceptions of the communicator’s trustworthiness, as well as their own science intelligence and intolerance for uncertainty. The findings suggest the uncertainty and certainty framings alike may prove troublesome for audiences—focus group participants had keen critiques of both—that a blunt admission of uncertainty may have mixed effects on perceptions of communicator trustworthiness (dependent on interactions between science intelligence and intolerance for uncertainty), and that ethical science communication should include candid uncertainty disclosures regardless. These combined findings also indicate that substantial uncertainties remain—paving the way for further research.