Issue ownership of science in the United States.

This study assesses whether the Democratic Party holds issue ownership over science in the United States. We analyze data from a national survey that asked 1041 adults questions specifically designed to measure perceptions of science ownership. While the results suggest that the Democratic Party does hold a significant advantage in ownership of science in an abstract sense, perceptions of ownership of specific types of science vary across the two parties. Those who identify as Independents drive much of the aggregate perceptions of ownership of science, whereas partisans' perceptions of issue ownership of science are mostly driven by in-party favoritism. Post hoc analyses suggest that news media use contributes to perceptions of science ownership and reinforces affinity-party preference.

Communicating CRISPR: Challenges and opportunities in engaging the public.

CRISPR technologies are advancing at a dizzying pace, and emerging cultural, sociopolitical, ethical, and legal implications continue to pose new challenges for public engagement. Recent calls for public engagement and dialogue on CRISPR applications stress the importance of nuanced thinking and responsible communication. In this chapter, we review public opinion research and find that a comprehensive and clear picture of global views on CRISPR is missing but is necessary to build the foundation for effective public engagement programs. We recommend community-based-participatory research as an inclusive and effective framework for shared knowledge production and decision-making practices for scientific experts and science communicators to engage in genuine and meaningful dialogue with community members in making informed consideration for important value-laden decisions. In response to the politicization of science, this chapter offers strategic communication techniques that can help those facilitating public engagement of CRISPR-based technologies keep cognitive biases, such as identity protective cognition, motivated reasoning, and confirmation bias, at bay.

Impact of Abstract Versus Concrete Conceptualization of Genetic Modification (GM) Technology on Public Perceptions.

Based on the scholarship of abstract/concrete cognition, mental schema, and the integrated model of behavior change, this study found that using concrete over abstract language increased support for specific genetically modified (GM) applications and GM in general, and improved intentions to purchase products containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs). An online survey with an embedded 3 × 2 experiment was conducted using a national sample of U.S. adults (N = 1,470). Participants were randomly assigned to conditions that varied in abstract/concrete conceptualization of GMOs and were prompted to assess GM risk and benefit perceptions with respect to human health and the environment. Regardless of whether they assessed risks or benefits, participants who assessed GMOs through concrete terms compared to abstract terms showed an increase in positive emotions, which in turn increased their support for specific GM applications and GM in general, and their intentions to buy products with GMOs.

Leveraging scientific credibility about Arctic sea ice trends in a polarized political environment.

This work argues that, in a polarized environment, scientists can minimize the likelihood that the audience's biased processing will lead to rejection of their message if they not only eschew advocacy but also, convey that they are sharers of knowledge faithful to science's way of knowing and respectful of the audience's intelligence; the sources on which they rely are well-regarded by both conservatives and liberals; and the message explains how the scientist arrived at the offered conclusion, is conveyed in a visual form that involves the audience in drawing its own conclusions, and capsulizes key inferences in an illustrative analogy. A pilot experiment raises the possibility that such a leveraging-involving-visualizing-analogizing message structure can increase acceptance of the scientific claims about the downward cross-decade trend in Arctic sea ice extent and elicit inferences consistent with the scientific consensus on climate change among conservatives exposed to misleadingly selective data in a partisan news source.