Understanding Public Opinion in Debates over Biomedical Research: Looking beyond Political Partisanship to Focus on Beliefs about Science and Society

As social scientists have investigated the political and social factors influencing public opinion in science-related policy debates, there has been growing interest in the implications of this research for public communication and outreach. Given the level of political polarization in the United States, much of the focus has been on partisan differences in public opinion, the strategies employed by political leaders and advocates that promote those differences, and the counter-strategies for overcoming them. Yet this focus on partisan differences tends to overlook the processes by which core beliefs about science and society impact public opinion and how these schema are often activated by specific frames of reference embedded in media coverage and popular discourse. In this study, analyzing cross-sectional, nationally representative survey data collected between 2002 and 2010, we investigate the relative influence of political partisanship and science-related schema on Americans' support for embryonic stem cell research. In comparison to the influence of partisan identity, our findings suggest that generalized beliefs about science and society were more chronically accessible, less volatile in relation to media attention and focusing events, and an overall stronger influence on public opinion. Classifying respondents into four unique audience groups based on their beliefs about science and society, we additionally find that individuals within each of these groups split relatively evenly by partisanship but differ on other important dimensions. The implications for public engagement and future research on controversies related to biomedical science are discussed

Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions through Behavioral Change : An Assessment of Past Research On Energy Use, Transportation and Water Consumption

17 p.Behavioral changes are certain to be an important component in reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and combating climate change. However, relatively little research has been done to clarify what is known about the ability to motivate people to change their behavior in a way that reduces GHGs. This report provides a preliminary overview of the existing research on this critical question. It then provides a framework for thinking about how to plan and execute GHG reducing behavioral change interventions. This is not a comprehensive assessment. Instead, it highlights some of the most readily available relevant research on behavioral change and GHG reductions in three domains: energy use, transportation, and water consumption. Our intent is to offer a clear, simple, basic guide that can serve as a starting point for implementation of behavioral change programs and for further research into the topic

Compassion fade and the challenge of environmental conservation

Compassion shown towards victims often decreases as the number of individuals in need of aid increases, identifiability of the victims decreases, and the proportion of victims helped shrinks. Such “compassion fade” may hamper individual-level and collective responses to pressing large-scale crises. To date, research on compassion fade has focused on humanitarian challenges; thus, it remains unknown whether and to what extent compassion fade emerges when victims are non-human others. Here we show that compassion fade occurs in the environmental domain, but only among non-environmentalists. These findings suggest that compassion fade may challenge our collective ability and willingness to confront the major environmental problems we face, including climate change. The observed moderation effect of environmental identity further indicates that compassion fade may present a significant psychological barrier to building broad public support for addressing these problems. Our results highlight the importance of bringing findings from the field of judgment and decision making to bear on pressing societal issues

The etiology of mathematical and reading (dis)ability covariation in a sample of Dutch twins

The genetic etiology of mathematical and reading (dis)ability has been studied in a number of distinct samples, but the true nature of the relationship between the two remains unclear. Data from the Netherlands Twin Register was used to determine the etiology of the relationship between mathematical and reading (dis)ability in adolescent twins. Ratings of mathematical and reading problems were obtained from parents of over 1500 twin pairs. Results of bivariate structural equation modeling showed a genetic correlation around .60, which explained over 90% of the phenotypic correlation between mathematical and reading ability. The genetic model was the same for males and females

Connecting on Climate: A Guide to Effective Climate Change Communication

Climate change is not a new issue, but the need for meaningful and sustainable solutions is more urgent than ever. Climate communicators and mainstream leaders are still grappling with how to help Americans find meaningful, actionable paths forward and overcome the social, political, psychological, and emotional barriers that have hindered progress on climate solutions. To connect with audiences and unlock success in climate change communication, communicators need to shift their approach. Communicators need to go beyond simply providing people with the facts about climate change. They need to connect with people’s values and worldviews and put solutions at the forefront to make climate change personally relevant to Americans and those they love. With this guide, we have brought together both researchers and practitioners to consolidate the best insights and evidence about how to communicate effectively about climate change. We have combined research from the Center for Research on Environmental Decisions (CRED) at The Earth Institute, Columbia University; ecoAmerica; and other institutions with insights that ecoAmerica has gleaned from communicating about climate change and other environmental issues with mainstream Americans and their leaders. This guide presents information in a digestible, actionable form to enable communicators to “up their game” when engaging Americans on climate solutions of all types and scales

Public estimates of support for offshore wind energy: False consensus, pluralistic ignorance, and partisan effects

Meeting future energy demands will require large-scale implementation of renewable energy projects. If one of these energy sources—offshore wind—becomes a common sight off coastlines, consideration of local public opinion and action will be critical. Previous research from the social sciences has lacked depth in examining the underlying factors that shape public opinion towards offshore wind development. The current research brings a new perspective to the literature by showing that how members of the public perceive support among others relates to their own opinions of offshore wind energy. We report results from two surveys. The first focused on opinion formation relating to offshore wind in general among New England residents, while the second focused on a specific offshore wind project in Rhode Island. We find evidence that both supporters and opponents of offshore wind underestimate levels of support among others, indicating a pluralistic ignorance effect and false consensus effect, respectively. We also find distinct patterns of perceived support among self-identified Republicans and Democrats. The findings hold important implications for policymakers and developers in understanding the nature of public support and opposition for offshore wind energy, particularly with respect to individuals’ willingness to publicly engage with offshore wind projects

Acknowledging uncertainty impacts public acceptance of climate scientists’ predictions

Predictions about the effects of climate change cannot be made with complete certainty, so acknowledging uncertainty may increase trust in scientists and public acceptance of their messages. Here we show that this is true regarding expressions of uncertainty, unless they are also accompanied by acknowledgements of irreducible uncertainty. A representative national sample of Americans read predictions about effects of global warming on sea level that included either a worst-case scenario (high partially bounded uncertainty) or the best and worst cases (fully bounded uncertainty). Compared to a control condition, expressing fully bounded but not high partially bounded uncertainty increased trust in scientists and message acceptance. However, these effects were eliminated when fully bounded uncertainty was accompanied by an acknowledgement that the full effects of sea-level rise cannot be quantified because of unpredictable storm surges. Thus, expressions of fully bounded uncertainty alone may enhance confidence in scientists and their assertions but not when the full extent of inevitable uncertainty is acknowledged

Results of ordered probit regression models predicting U.S. adult support for embryonic stem cell research.

<p>Note:</p><p>* p<.05.</p><p>** p<.01.</p><p>*** p<.001.</p><p>Respondents were asked: “On the whole, how much do you favor or oppose medical research that uses stem cells from human embryos - do you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose this?” Responses are coded in the direction of increasing support. Source: Virginia Commonwealth University Life Sciences Surveys, 2002–2010, N = 8,105. No survey was collected in 2009.</p