Understanding and Addressing Misinformation About Science (2025) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 Sources of Misinformation About Science
4 Sources of Misinformation About Science
Pages 75-100
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 75... ...
. In contrast, scientific beliefs are the beliefs that people hold regarding science.
|
From page 76... ...
Characterizing the Prevalence of Misinformation About Science In its review, the committee found that there is more literature on the generalizable prevalence of misbeliefs than of misinformation, arguably because the former is easier to measure. Misbeliefs are typically measured through precisely articulated false statements ("Do you think early childhood vaccines cause autism?
|
From page 77... ...
. This sample of tweets, in turn, was very small (only 369 tweets were evaluated as substantiated or unsubstantiated by scientific evidence)
|
From page 78... ...
Given what is known about, for example, the role of partisan media outlets (defined based on the ideological slant of their news content and/or audiences; Budak et al., 2016; Robertson et al., 2018) with large audiences in distributing misinformation about science (see later discussion on "partisan media outlets")
|
From page 79... ...
Sites rated "not credible" were 3.67 times more likely to contain false claims than those rated as "more credible." Beyond that study, there is relatively little evaluation of how much news content from mainstream news media may be characterized as misinformation about science. Additionally, some studies of science-related content in mainstream news media do not use of the term "misinformation" but are essentially examining misinformation about science as defined in the context of this report.
|
From page 80... ...
It also comes from within science itself, via scientists and medical professionals. In some cases, production of misinformation about science may involve an organized effort, meaning that many actors and organizations work together to seed and amplify false information about a particular science topic to achieve economic and/or political goals.
|
From page 81... ...
. One of the most well-documented examples of such coordinated, systematic efforts in the literature involves the efforts of some fossil fuel companies, utility companies, public relations firms, think tanks, foundations, trade groups, politicians, partisan media, and scientists who were reported to work in concert to deny climate science and exert undue influence on policymaking around environmental issues (Björnberg et al., 2017; Dunlap & McCright, 2011; Farrell, 2015)
|
From page 82... ...
. Many scholars also report that the supplement industry often uses health claims that are unsupported by scientific evidence to promote its products and boost sales (Ayoob et al., 2002; Rachul et al., 2020; Wagner et al., 2020; also see later section on Alternative Health and Science Media)
|
From page 83... ...
For example, the pharmaceutical industry engages in valuable science communication, marketing, and education to doctors, policymakers, and the public that enables patient access to health-promoting and life-saving medicines and treatments. Likewise, corporate social responsibility has become a guiding framework for strategic corporate practice, including around the environment and climate-related issues (Latapí Agudelo et al., 2019)
|
From page 84... ...
Mainstream News Media News organizations and journalists are key mediators of science information and as such misinformation as well. As noted in Chapter 3, U.S.
|
From page 85... ...
. Mainstream news media organizations follow a set of professional norms and values that govern journalistic practice and shape the nature of news coverage.
|
From page 86... ...
. This is likely due to a confluence of factors, including journalistic norms and informational biases, over-reliance on public relations and other information subsidies, exaggerations and omissions in the original scientific articles, and lack of resources and scientific expertise on the part of journalists and news organizations (Woloshin et al., 2009b)
|
From page 87... ...
. Partisan Media Outlets In contrast to mainstream news outlets, partisan media outlets present information from a specific ideological view.
|
From page 88... ...
. Studies on the role of partisan media outlets in the production and spread of misinformation about science, mainly climate change and C OVID-19, have also largely focused on conservative media outlets and less so on more liberal-leaning media outlets.
|
From page 89... ...
. Importantly, the distinct and specialized identities that ethnic media producers must convey in relation to mainstream media, mainstream society institutions, and the communi ties they serve become a strain on providing wholly accurate information in their reporting (Matsaganis et al., 2011)
|
From page 90... ...
pioneering study of WeChat and how misinformation flows through Chinese diasporic communities on the platform reveals a combination of factors that amplify misinformation. These include a low barrier to entry in branded content publishing; a lack of local news coverages on issues of particular interest to Chinese immigrants; and intimate communication spaces where users are connected by common -- mostly identity-based -- affiliations.
|
From page 91... ...
For example, an analysis of nearly 95,000 online articles shared on social media between 2009 and 2019 found that the most visible and persistent content related to genetically modified foods originated from alternative health sites (Ryan et al., 2020)
|
From page 92... ...
survey conducted in 2018 and 2019 found that approximately 26% of Americans sometimes or regularly watch health- and medical-related TV talk shows, 22% sometimes or regularly follow social media accounts dedicated to alternative health, and 15% sometimes or regularly read alternative health blogs (Stecula et al., 2022)
|
From page 93... ...
. Although relatively rare, some fictional films feature plotlines that are entirely based on misinformation, such as the 2015 thriller Consumed, in which a mother discovers genetically modified food might be behind her son's mysterious illness, defying wide scientific agreement that GM food does not carry human health risks.
|
From page 94... ...
. For example, some climate scientists have argued that the documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle (2007)
|
From page 95... ...
. Whereas industry and political actors often inflate Type II error, or false negatives, by inappropriately emphasizing scientific uncertainty when the weight of evidence overwhelmingly supports a specific interpretation, individual scientists or teams of scientists historically engaged in "p-hacking" where scientists build theory around statistically significant findings that were discovered after examination of the data, rather than accurately reporting them as post hoc observations.
|
From page 96... ...
. News media coverage of preprints likewise surged during the pandemic; yet journalists inconsistently provided context that described preprint research as preliminary and unvetted (Fleerackers et al., 2022; van Schalkwyk & Dudek, 2022)
|
From page 97... ...
Doctors are also highly trusted by the public (Pew Research Center, 2019a; also see Chapter 3) , and yet, healthcare professionals can be misinformed about science and subsequently 1 AAAS Communicating Science Workshops provide scientists and engineers with training and support to more effectively engage with the public through modules based on the latest science communication research and public engagement best practices.
|
From page 98... ...
. In marketing opioids in the 1990s, the pharmaceutical industry convinced primary-care physicians that chronic pain was under-treated in society and that opioids were a safe, non-addictive way to treat that pain; as mentioned above, an aggressive pharmaceutical sales force recruited physicians not only to prescribe opioids themselves but also to influence their medical peers to do the same (Meier, 2018; Michaels, 2020)
|
From page 99... ...
SUMMARY Misinformation about science is produced from a wide range of sources, including corporations, governments, the news media, partisan news outlets, a variety of "alternative" health websites and social media accounts, popular culture, the scientific and medical community, and highly motivated individuals. However, current limitations related to measurement and data access impede a comprehensive assessment of the prevalence of misinformation about science across different levels and sectors of society.
|
From page 100... ...
Conclusion 4-4: Science reporting for the general public may be par ticularly prone to the unintentional spread of misinformation about science. Several factors can influence this, including journalistic norms (e.g., giving equal weight to both sides of a scientific debate, even when the scientific evidence overwhelmingly points in one direction)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.