Summary: A groundbreaking study has developed a systematic way to identify polarized scientific messages in digital communication. The research reveals how extreme rhetoric, even when supporting scientifically accurate positions, can deepen social divisions and hinder critical thinking about important scientific issues.
Journal: Journal of Science Communication, October 28, 2024, METHOD OF RESEARCH: Meta-analysis
Reading time: 4 minutes
The Problem with Polarized Science
When discussing complex scientific topics like vaccines or climate change, extreme messaging can sometimes come from surprising sources – the scientific community itself. A new study published in the Journal of Science Communication examines how this polarization affects public understanding of science.
“Polarized messages in online science communication often present extreme views about a specific scientific topic, which can stir strong emotions, reinforce group loyalty, and deepen divisions in society,” explains Thiago Cruvinel, professor at the University of São Paulo, Brazil.
Beyond Simple Right and Wrong
The research team conducted a comprehensive review of scientific literature examining polarized messages in online science communication. Their analysis revealed that oversimplified, black-and-white presentations of scientific information can be counterproductive, even when supporting factual conclusions.
“Our codification system is grounded in a framework that encompasses 20 distinct codes, categorized into four key dimensions: sideness, criticism, emphasis, and discordance,” explains Cruvinel.
Understanding the Impact
The effects of polarized scientific communication can be far-reaching. While such messages might seem to strengthen support among those who already agree, they can actually create deeper divisions within society and discourage critical thinking – a crucial element of scientific progress.
“For example, to make people feel certain and comfortable, a one-sided message might use terms related to conflict or separation, even when talking about well-known scientific topics like climate change caused by humans,” Cruvinel notes.
A Tool for Better Communication
The study’s findings offer practical applications for science communicators. The researchers developed a systematic approach to identifying polarized content in scientific messages, providing a valuable tool for journalists and researchers.
The coding system they created could help science communicators avoid unintentionally contributing to polarization while still maintaining scientific accuracy. This balanced approach aims to encourage critical thinking and open dialogue about scientific issues.
Further Reading:
– Journal of Science Communication Research Portal
– University of São Paulo Science Communication Department
Enjoy this story? Get our newsletter!
If you found this reporting useful, please consider supporting our work with a small donation. Your contribution lets us continue to bring you accurate, thought-provoking science and medical news that you can trust. Independent reporting takes time, effort, and resources, and your support makes it possible for us to keep exploring the stories that matter to you. Thank you so much!