MAN MADE BLACK HOLES AND BIG BANGS: INTEGRATION OF SCIENCE INFORMATION

INTO EVERYDAY THINKINGNelly Courvoisier, Alain Clémence & Eva Green - Universtiy of Lausanne

THEO

RY HYPOTHESES

METHOD

LHCCO

NCLU

SION

RESULTS

Account 1.1

Account 2.1

Generation 1 Account 1.2

Generation 2 Account 2.2

Generation 0 (original texts)

Text1:Controversy

Nuclear

Text2:Controversy Computer

Account 1.4Account 1.3

Account 2.4Account 2.3

Text3:Descriptive

Nuclear

Text4:DescriptiveComputer

Controversial Descriptive

Each generation 1 (G1) participant summarized one of the four original texts. Generation 2 (G2) participants summarized

one of G1 written accounts. Initial texts evoked creation of potential black holes in the LHC (controversy), vs historical decription of the construction of LHC (descriptive). Additional parts evoked nuclear vs computer science improvements thanks to the LHC.

1. Adapted Serial Reproduction Design

3. Participants

Total N = 181 (NG1 = 121, NG2 = 60)61.9% Female

79% from University72.5% Native French speakers92.8% already knew CERN

Objecti�cation. Di�usion: persistence of the controversial term “black hole”. Orientation of

focalization: increase of the term “black hole” in controversial condition, increase of other expert terms in descriptive condi-tion.

Anchoring. Positive attitudes towards science (trust in science and scientists) and CERN predict use of more scienti�c terms from the initial message, controlling for prior knowledge about science and understanding.

2. VariablesIndependents:

Trust (N = 73) vs Mistrust (N = 107) towards science and scientists

Pro (N = 116) vs Anti-CERN (N = 48) Controls:Prior knowledge, understanding, perceived di�culty, educationDependents:

Terminology in the accounts: “black hole” vs other expert terms

0.5

1.0

1.5

Particle

*

CERN*

Accelerato

r*

Black H

ole

Matter*

Big Bang*

Collision†

Higgs*LHC*

1. Objecti�cation

2. Anchoring

G1 G2* t (179) > 1.99; p < .05; † t (179) = 1.71; p < .10

t (119) = 5.93; p < .01 t (58) = 3.90; p < .01 t (58) = -2.27; p < .05t (119) = -3.07; p < .01

t (179) = 1.04, ns

Other expert terminology

0.2

0.6

1.0

Descriptive

Controversial

Black Hole

G2

G1

0.2

0.6

1.0

Black Hole Other expert terminology

F (8,171) = 11.08**; R² = .34 F (8,155) = 10.53**; R² = .35Other expert terminology

.12† -.14*-.20** -.15*

.24** .26**

-.43** -.43**

nsControls: prior knowledge, understanding,

level of educationTrust*type of text

Controls: prior knowledge, understanding,

level of educationAtt.CERN*type of text

Trust in science and scientists (Trust group)

Type of text (Descriptive)

Perceived di�culty of the text

Generation (G2)

Attitudes towards CERN(Anti-CERN)

Type of text (Descriptive)

Perceived di�culty of the text

Generation (G2)

ns

*p<.05.**p<.01. †p<.10

Social Representations Theory & science communication:

Green & Clémence (2008): 3 studies on the transformation of information concerning the dicovery of a potential faithfulness gene, through di�usion in communication chains:Results: 1. Objecti�cation: Focalization on strange or striking elements of the mes-sage.2. Anchoring: E�ect of beliefs about genetics on transformation of information (i.e change in vocabulary to suit better everyday communication).

CERN and the Large Hadron Collider

CERN = European Organization for Nuclear Research, near GenevaLHC = particle accelerator: 27km long, buried 100m underground, accelerates particle close to light speed, creating “mini big bangs”Controversy about the LHC, widely debated in newspapers around the world:

fear that it could create black holes and destroy the Earth!

Overall hypotheses are con�rmed: the

black hole controversy persists through generations and is function of initial mes-sage. Participants with more positive atti-tudes compensate the focalization on the controversy by using more other expert ter-minology in their accounts.

This study:

- Adds evidence for the importance of objec-ti�cation and anchoring in the sense making of information, underscoring the relevance of SRT in the study of dif-fusion of ideas.

- Helps transferring the question of public understanding of science from a cognitive problem to a dynamic social and cognitive phenomenon.

Social Representations Theory & thinking systems

Objecti�cation (focalization on core and strange aspects of informa-tion) and anchoring (integration in prior beliefs, experiences etc.) pro-cesses occur during transfer of information between informative think-ing (e.g science) to representative thinking (common sense)