Leonie Fian, Nina Vaupotič, Isabel Richter, Albert A Koelmans, Sabine Pahl
{"title":"传播科学的不确定性:微塑料健康风险背景下信息和受众特征的影响。","authors":"Leonie Fian, Nina Vaupotič, Isabel Richter, Albert A Koelmans, Sabine Pahl","doi":"10.1177/09636625251410494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Communicating uncertainties is central to science communication, yet evidence on its effects is inconclusive. In an online experiment with a quasi-representative sample in Austria (<i>N</i> = 1126), we investigated the effects of <i>message</i> (uncertainty type) and <i>audience</i> characteristics (science-specific attitudes/beliefs) as potential moderating factors on risk perception and policy support in the context of microplastic health effects. Uncertainty communication, specifically communicated lack of scientific consensus (<i>consensus uncertainty</i>), triggered lower risk perception (small effect), and indirectly decreased policy support through message credibility and risk perception. These negative effects were lower (and not statistically significant) when communicating the remaining knowledge gaps (<i>deficient uncertainty</i>). Beliefs about science as a debate were positively associated with risk perception, trust in scientists with policy support and preference for information about uncertain science with both. However, these audience characteristics did not moderate the effects of uncertainty communication. The results highlight the importance of considering uncertainty types in environmental and health risk communication.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"470-489"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13096624/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Communicating scientific uncertainties: Effects of message and audience characteristics in the context of microplastic health risks.\",\"authors\":\"Leonie Fian, Nina Vaupotič, Isabel Richter, Albert A Koelmans, Sabine Pahl\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09636625251410494\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Communicating uncertainties is central to science communication, yet evidence on its effects is inconclusive. In an online experiment with a quasi-representative sample in Austria (<i>N</i> = 1126), we investigated the effects of <i>message</i> (uncertainty type) and <i>audience</i> characteristics (science-specific attitudes/beliefs) as potential moderating factors on risk perception and policy support in the context of microplastic health effects. Uncertainty communication, specifically communicated lack of scientific consensus (<i>consensus uncertainty</i>), triggered lower risk perception (small effect), and indirectly decreased policy support through message credibility and risk perception. These negative effects were lower (and not statistically significant) when communicating the remaining knowledge gaps (<i>deficient uncertainty</i>). Beliefs about science as a debate were positively associated with risk perception, trust in scientists with policy support and preference for information about uncertain science with both. However, these audience characteristics did not moderate the effects of uncertainty communication. The results highlight the importance of considering uncertainty types in environmental and health risk communication.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Understanding of Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"470-489\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13096624/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Understanding of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625251410494\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2026/1/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Understanding of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625251410494","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Communicating scientific uncertainties: Effects of message and audience characteristics in the context of microplastic health risks.
Communicating uncertainties is central to science communication, yet evidence on its effects is inconclusive. In an online experiment with a quasi-representative sample in Austria (N = 1126), we investigated the effects of message (uncertainty type) and audience characteristics (science-specific attitudes/beliefs) as potential moderating factors on risk perception and policy support in the context of microplastic health effects. Uncertainty communication, specifically communicated lack of scientific consensus (consensus uncertainty), triggered lower risk perception (small effect), and indirectly decreased policy support through message credibility and risk perception. These negative effects were lower (and not statistically significant) when communicating the remaining knowledge gaps (deficient uncertainty). Beliefs about science as a debate were positively associated with risk perception, trust in scientists with policy support and preference for information about uncertain science with both. However, these audience characteristics did not moderate the effects of uncertainty communication. The results highlight the importance of considering uncertainty types in environmental and health risk communication.
期刊介绍:
Public Understanding of Science is a fully peer reviewed international journal covering all aspects of the inter-relationships between science (including technology and medicine) and the public. Public Understanding of Science is the only journal to cover all aspects of the inter-relationships between science (including technology and medicine) and the public. Topics Covered Include... ·surveys of public understanding and attitudes towards science and technology ·perceptions of science ·popular representations of science ·scientific and para-scientific belief systems ·science in schools