Science Communication and the Problematic Impact of Descriptive Norms

British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 74 (3):713-738 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

When scientists or science reporters communicate research results to the public, this often involves ethical and epistemic risks. One such risk arises when scientific claims cause cognitive or behavioural changes in the audience that contribute to the self-fulfilment of these claims. I argue that the ethical and epistemic problems that such self-fulfilment effects may pose are much broader and more common than hitherto appreciated. Moreover, these problems are often due to a specific psychological phenomenon that has been neglected in the research on science communication: many people tend to conform to ‘descriptive norms’, that is, norms capturing (perceptions of) what others commonly do, think, or feel. Because of this tendency, science communication may frequently produce significant social harm. I contend that scientists have a responsibility to assess the risk of this potential harm and consider adopting strategies to mitigate it. I introduce one such strategy and argue that its implementation is independently well motivated by the fact that it helps improve scientific accuracy.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-11-03

Downloads
1,437 (#12,163)

6 months
262 (#10,187)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Uwe Peters
Utrecht University

References found in this work

Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal.Heather Douglas - 2009 - University of Pittsburgh Press.
The weirdest people in the world?Joseph Henrich, Steven J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2-3):61-83.
The Structure of Science.Ernest Nagel - 1961 - Les Etudes Philosophiques 17 (2):275-275.
Science in a democratic society.Philip Kitcher - 2011 - Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books.

View all 32 references / Add more references