IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nas/journl/v119y2022pe2107760119.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Widespread use of National Academies consensus reports by the American public

Author

Listed:
  • Diana Hicks

    (a School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332;)

  • Matteo Zullo

    (a School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332;; b Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA 30303;)

  • Ameet Doshi

    (a School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332;; c Princeton University Library, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544;)

  • Omar I. Asensio

    (a School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332;; d Institute for Data Engineering & Science, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30308)

Abstract

Advocates for open access argue that people need scientific information, although they lack evidence for this. Using Google’s recently developed deep learning natural language processing model, which offers unrivalled comprehension of subtle differences in meaning, 1.6 million people downloading National Academies reports were classified, not just into broad categories such as researchers and teachers but also precisely delineated small groups such as hospital chaplains, veterans, and science fiction authors. The results reveal adults motivated to seek out the most credible sources, engage with challenging material, use it to improve the services they provide, and learn more about the world they live in. The picture contrasts starkly with the dominant narrative of a misinformed and manipulated public targeted by social media.

Suggested Citation

  • Diana Hicks & Matteo Zullo & Ameet Doshi & Omar I. Asensio, 2022. "Widespread use of National Academies consensus reports by the American public," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 119(9), pages 2107760119-, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:nas:journl:v:119:y:2022:p:e2107760119
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.pnas.org/content/119/9/e2107760119.full
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nas:journl:v:119:y:2022:p:e2107760119. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Eric Cain (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.pnas.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.