IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nathum/v3y2019i9d10.1038_s41562-019-0632-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effective strategies for rebutting science denialism in public discussions

Author

Listed:
  • Philipp Schmid

    (University of Erfurt
    University of Erfurt)

  • Cornelia Betsch

    (University of Erfurt
    University of Erfurt)

Abstract

Science deniers question scientific milestones and spread misinformation, contradicting decades of scientific endeavour. Advocates for science need effective rebuttal strategies and are concerned about backfire effects in public debates. We conducted six experiments to assess how to mitigate the influence of a denier on the audience. An internal meta-analysis across all the experiments revealed that not responding to science deniers has a negative effect on attitudes towards behaviours favoured by science (for example, vaccination) and intentions to perform these behaviours. Providing the facts about the topic or uncovering the rhetorical techniques typical for denialism had positive effects. We found no evidence that complex combinations of topic and technique rebuttals are more effective than single strategies, nor that rebutting science denialism in public discussions backfires, not even in vulnerable groups (for example, US conservatives). As science deniers use the same rhetoric across domains, uncovering their rhetorical techniques is an effective and economic addition to the advocates’ toolbox.

Suggested Citation

  • Philipp Schmid & Cornelia Betsch, 2019. "Effective strategies for rebutting science denialism in public discussions," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(9), pages 931-939, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:3:y:2019:i:9:d:10.1038_s41562-019-0632-4
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-019-0632-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-019-0632-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41562-019-0632-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jay J. Van Bavel & Katherine Baicker & Paulo S. Boggio & Valerio Capraro & Aleksandra Cichocka & Mina Cikara & Molly J. Crockett & Alia J. Crum & Karen M. Douglas & James N. Druckman & John Drury & Oe, 2020. "Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(5), pages 460-471, May.
    2. M. Carmen Erviti & Mónica Codina & Bienvenido León, 2020. "Pro-Science, Anti-Science and Neutral Science in Online Videos on Climate Change, Vaccines and Nanotechnology," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 329-338.
    3. Robert G. Alexander & Stephen L. Macknik & Susana Martinez-Conde, 2022. "What the Neuroscience and Psychology of Magic Reveal about Misinformation," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, September.
    4. Sieds, 2021. "Complete Volume LXXV n. 2 2021," RIEDS - Rivista Italiana di Economia, Demografia e Statistica - The Italian Journal of Economic, Demographic and Statistical Studies, SIEDS Societa' Italiana di Economia Demografia e Statistica, vol. 75(2), pages 1-197, April-Jun.
    5. Tobia Spampatti & Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Evelina Trutnevyte & Tobias Brosch, 2024. "Psychological inoculation strategies to fight climate disinformation across 12 countries," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(2), pages 380-398, February.
    6. Rosario D'Agata & Simona Gozzo, 2021. "The deniers on twitter. The no mask groups and their communication," RIEDS - Rivista Italiana di Economia, Demografia e Statistica - The Italian Journal of Economic, Demographic and Statistical Studies, SIEDS Societa' Italiana di Economia Demografia e Statistica, vol. 75(2), pages 149-160, April-Jun.
    7. Stephan Lewandowsky & Konstantinos Armaos & Hendrik Bruns & Philipp Schmid & Dawn Liu Holford & Ulrike Hahn & Ahmed Al-Rawi & Sunita Sah & John Cook, 2022. "When Science Becomes Embroiled in Conflict: Recognizing the Public’s Need for Debate while Combating Conspiracies and Misinformation," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 26-40, March.
    8. Sacha Altay & Marlène Schwartz & Anne-Sophie Hacquin & Aurélien Allard & Stefaan Blancke & Hugo Mercier, 2022. "Scaling up interactive argumentation by providing counterarguments with a chatbot," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(4), pages 579-592, April.

    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:nat:nathum:v:3:y:2019:i:9:d:10.1038_s41562-019-0632-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    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.