Matthew C. Nisbet, Ph.D.

School of Communication

American University

Washington DC

Models of Science and Environmental Communication

The Deficit Model:

The Sputnik Fable

• There was a point in the past when the public was knowledgeable

about science and strongly supportive. Need to return to that point

in the past.

1957: Is The Past That Different from Today?

Science Literacy

• 12% of the public understood the scientific approach or method.

• On basic questions tapping knowledge of polio, fluoridation,

radioactivity, and space satellites, only 1 in 6 could answer all four

questions correctly.

• Only 38% knew that the Moon was smaller than the Earth and only

4% could correctly indicate the distance in miles between the Moon

and the Earth.

Michael, D.N. (1960). The Beginning of the Space Age and Public Opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 573-582;

Withey, S.B. (1959). Public opinion about science and scientists. Public Opinion Quarterly, 382-388.

1957: Is The Past That Different from Today?

Low Knowledge but Support for Science

Withey, S.B. (1959). Public opinion about science and scientists. Public Opinion Quarterly, 382-388.

1957: Is The Past That Different from Today?

Perception is Reference Dependent

Michael, D.N. (1960). The Beginning of the Space Age and Public Opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 573-582;

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Behind Russia,

Security

Propaganda Nothing

significant

Religious

Meaning

Scientific

Advancement

1957:

Looking to the

future, what

would you say is

the real

meaning of

Sputnik to us

here in

America?

2008: Is The Past That Different from Today?

Increasing Education, Low Science Literacy

National Science Board (2008). Chapter 7: Public Attitudes about Science and Technology. Science & Engineering

Indicators.

2008: Is The Past That Different from Today?

Deep Public Optimism and Trust in Science

• More than 70% of all American adults believe that the benefits of scientific

research outweigh the harmful results.

• More than 85% of Americans agree that “even if it brings no immediate

benefits, scientific research that advances the frontiers of knowledge is

necessary and should be supported by the federal government.”

• On climate change, stem cell research, and food biotechnology,

Americans believe scientists hold greater expertise, are less self

interested, and should have greater say in decisions than industry leaders,

elected officials, and/or religious leaders.

• Among institutions, only the military has greater trust than science.

Analysis of 2006 General Social Survey; National Science Board (2008). Chapter 7: Public Attitudes about Science

and Technology. Science & Engineering Indicators.

Social

relationships,

networks, and

identities

Trust, credibility,

alienation relative to

science-related

institutions

The uptake

and

influence of

“expert”

science-

related

knowledge

Filtered/mediated

Practical reason,

localized knowledge

Early 1990s: A Paradigm Sheep?

Social Identity, Trust, and Relationships Matter

Bryan Wynne

Wynne’s Model:

Common Criteria Used to Judge Experts & Institutions

1) Does expert knowledge work? Do predictions fail?

2) Do expert claims pay attention to other available knowledge?

3) Are experts open to criticism? Admission of errors, or oversights?

4) What are the social / institutional affiliations of experts? Historical track record of trustworthiness, affiliation with industry?

5) What issues overlap or connect to lay experience?

Kahneman, D. (2003) In T. Frängsmyr (Ed.), Les Prix Nobel: The Nobel

Prizes 2002 (pp. 449-489). Stockholm, Sweden: Nobel Foundation.

3. Judgments and Decisions Are Context Dependent

Kahneman, D. (2003) In T. Frängsmyr (Ed.), Les Prix Nobel: The Nobel Prizes

2002 (pp. 449-489). Stockholm, Sweden: Nobel Foundation.

3. Judgments and Decisions Are Context Dependent

Maine’s Energy Future:

Supply or Innovation Problem?

Nisbet, Maibach, & Leiserowitz (2011). American Journal of Public Health.

Nisbet, Maibach, & Leiserowitz (2011). American Journal of Public Health.

Maine’s Climate Future:

Environmental or Health Threat?

Stage 1: In-Depth Interviews w/ 70 Subjects from

Six Distinct Audience Segments (Summer 2009)Maibach, E., Nisbet, M.C. et al. (2010). BMC Public Health 10: 299.

Segments 4-6:

Sentence Specific Reaction To Public Health Essay

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 B1 B2 B3 B4 C1 C2

DISENGAGED DOUBTFUL

DISMISSIVE POPULATION

Scores reflect respondent average values by segment for the difference between the number of times

each of 18 sentences were marked “especially clear or helpful” and “especially confusing or

unhelpful.”

Myers, T., Nisbet, M.C., Maibach, E.W., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). A Public Health Frame

Arouses Hopeful Emotions about Climate Change. Climatic Change Research

Letters, 1105-1121.

Stage 2: Testing Environmental, National

Security Frames vs. Public Health Frame

Myers, T., Nisbet, M.C., Maibach, E.W., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). A Public Health Frame

Arouses Hopeful Emotions about Climate Change. Climatic Change Research

Letters, 1105-1121.

Stage 2: Testing Environmental, National

Security Frames vs.

Public Health Frame