IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ces/epofor/v26y2025i04p26-32.html

Speaking Science in the Digital Age: How Political Expression on Social Media Shapes Trust in Experts

Author

Listed:
  • Eleonora Alabrese
  • Francesco Capozza

Abstract

Key Messages:Social media may raise the visibility of politically vocal scientists, but also undermine public trust in scienceAcademics’ political expression can damage their credibility and exacerbate polarizationDepending on the audience’s views, scientific work on political topics is often seen as partisan rather than neutralPolicymakers must strike a balance between supporting science, maintaining public trust, and mitigating polarizing effectsBetter media literacy and clear communication norms can help resolve the “visibility versus credibility” dilemma

Suggested Citation

  • Eleonora Alabrese & Francesco Capozza, 2025. "Speaking Science in the Digital Age: How Political Expression on Social Media Shapes Trust in Experts," EconPol Forum, CESifo, vol. 26(04), pages 26-32, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:epofor:v:26:y:2025:i:04:p:26-32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/econpol-forum-4-2025-alabrese-etal-digital-age.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:plo:pone00:0197265 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. James N. Druckman & Mary C. McGrath, 2019. "The evidence for motivated reasoning in climate change preference formation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(2), pages 111-119, February.
    3. repec:plo:pone00:0229446 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Prashant Garg & Thiemo Fetzer, 2025. "Political expression of academics on Twitter," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 9(9), pages 1815-1832, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Guglielmo Zappalà, 2023. "Drought Exposure and Accuracy: Motivated Reasoning in Climate Change Beliefs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(3), pages 649-672, August.
    2. Michael Carolan, 2020. "Filtering perceptions of climate change and biotechnology: values and views among Colorado farmers and ranchers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 121-139, March.
    3. Paul Fesenfeld, Lukas & Maier, Maiken & Brazzola, Nicoletta & Stolz, Niklas & Sun, Yixian & Kachi, Aya, 2023. "How information, social norms, and experience with novel meat substitutes can create positive political feedback and demand-side policy change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    4. Nonye Chukwuma & Robert-Walter Dumisani Zondo, 2024. "Leadership and communication strategies for managing organisational change: insights from eThekwini automobile dealerships," International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy (2687-2293), Bussecon International Academy, vol. 6(4), pages 159-177, September.
    5. Daniel J. Blake & Stanislav Markus & Julio Martinez‐Suarez, 2024. "Populist Syndrome and Nonmarket Strategy," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 525-560, March.
    6. Reynolds, J.P. & Archer, S. & Pilling, M. & Kenny, M. & Hollands, G.J. & Marteau, T.M., 2019. "Public acceptability of nudging and taxing to reduce consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and food: A population-based survey experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Felix Chopra & Ingar K. Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2021. "The Demand for Fact-Checking," CESifo Working Paper Series 9061, CESifo.
    8. Lackner, Teresa & Fierro, Luca E. & Mellacher, Patrick, 2025. "Opinion dynamics meet agent-based climate economics: An integrated analysis of carbon taxation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    9. Byungdoo Kim & David L. Kay & Jonathon P. Schuldt, 2021. "Will I have to move because of climate change? Perceived likelihood of weather- or climate-related relocation among the US public," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-8, March.
    10. Welsch, Heinz, 2021. "How climate-friendly behavior relates to moral identity and identity-protective cognition: Evidence from the European social surveys," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    11. Alexandre Morin-Chassé & Erick Lachapelle, 2020. "Partisan strength and the politicization of global climate change: a re-examination of Schuldt, Roh, and Schwarz 2015," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(1), pages 31-40, March.
    12. Montfort Simon, 2023. "Key predictors for climate policy support and political mobilization: The role of beliefs and preferences," PLOS Climate, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(8), pages 1-21, August.
    13. Chopra, Felix & Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2022. "Do people demand fact-checked news? Evidence from U.S. Democrats," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    14. Clarke, Christopher E. & Evensen, Darrick T.N., 2023. "Attention to news media coverage of unconventional oil/gas development impacts: Exploring psychological antecedents and effects on issue support," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    15. Eugene Y. Chan & Jack Lin, 2022. "Political ideology and psychological reactance: how serious should climate change be?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 1-22, May.
    16. Thomas Zeitzoff & Grace Gold, 2024. "Cyber and contentious politics: Evidence from the US radical environmental movement," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 61(1), pages 134-149, January.
    17. Folco Panizza & Piero Ronzani & Tiffany Morisseau & Simone Mattavelli & Carlo Martini, 2023. "How do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking?," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    18. Trisha R. Shrum, 2021. "The salience of future impacts and the willingness to pay for climate change mitigation: an experiment in intergenerational framing," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-20, March.
    19. repec:rim:rimwps:20-15 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Cheng, Ing-Haw & Hsiaw, Alice, 2022. "Distrust in experts and the origins of disagreement," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    21. Céline Nauges & Sarah Ann Wheeler & Kelly S. Fielding, 2021. "The relationship between country and individual household wealth and climate change concern: the mediating role of control," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(11), pages 16481-16503, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ces:epofor:v:26:y:2025:i:04:p:26-32. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.