Researcher(s):
Zoey Bahardar Erin Carlson Gabby Francolla Rachel Jacobson
ENVS course(s): 330 Initiated: March 2016 Completed: April 2016 Go to project site
|
Framing: How is science intentionally used to support specific agendas and platforms?
In the scientific community, ignoring uncertainty means research is considered to be incomplete, but for the public, uncertainty is seen as a blow to the research's credibility. An article published recently in Nature described new model predictions, with a degree of uncertainty, about how fast the Antarctic ice sheets will melt and it is sooner than previous predictions. These findings were spread to the larger public through news media that simplified the more complex and detailed study for comprehension on a wider scale, also often downplaying the uncertain nature of these models.
Our project focused on the following question: How do expressions and interpretations of uncertainty help or hinder discourse surrounding the melting ice sheets in Antarctica? We analyzed the discussion of the Antarctic ice sheets in various outlets (the original study published in Nature, three news articles, and public comments), what they included or excluded, and whether these discourses help or hinder productive conversations.
What we found was that uncertainty was emphasized the most in the original scientific publication, then a fair amount in news outlets (but even differences between them), but then the least in the public comments. We also noticed that a "call-to-action" sentiment was theme of many of the comments, a component of the news articles, and completely absent from the scientific study.