Abstract
Uncertainty is supposed to be the most underrated element of science communication. While being a crucial part of scientific research, uncertainty is perceived by the recipients of science communication as unwanted and prone to create mistakes and malfunction in everyday life. Nevertheless, uncertainty can and should play a significant role in science communication. A growing number of studies deals with different aspects of uncertainty and gives valuable ideas on how to implement the concept of uncertainty into science interpretation and communication. This article will draw the attention to the multidimensional characteristics of uncertainty. Since decision-makers have to consider variability, uncertainty, and probability into feasibility analysis, we show that the communication of the scientific surplus value of these concepts must be centered within modern science communication efforts. A special focus will be on the use of the concepts of uncertainty and variability within interpretive and educational programs in museum environments.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Walker et al. (2003, p. 5) provide a “general definition of uncertainty as being any deviation from the unachievable ideal of completely deterministic knowledge of the relevant system.”
- 2.
May (2001, p. 891) comments the necessity of communicating uncertainty in his column for Nature, in which he states that “it helps to recognize, and explicitly acknowledge, these uncertainties .”
- 3.
Thompson distinguishes between variability and uncertainty . Nevertheless, he shows that both concepts have similar impact on risk communication – therefore, it is justifiable that for the purpose of this article, both concepts are combined into the term “uncertainty.”
- 4.
By interpreting numerous studies by anthropologists, psychologists, economists, and neuroscientists, Tucker reasons, “…that recent research in neuroscience and in the evolutionary social sciences is developing just such an explanatory and predictive theory.” He does not explicitly quote such studies, by mentions, that they are “… providing broad-based experimental and observational support for this new perspective” (Tucker and Ferson 2008, p. 10).
- 5.
An interesting study about the impact of Astroturf communication has been conducted by Cho et al. (2011). They also give a detailed summary of recent research on astroturfing.
- 6.
Uncertainty: something that is doubtful or unknown, retrieved from Merriam-Webster, www.merriam-webster.com (Merriam-Webster. www.merriam-webster.com. Accessed 1 Jul 2014).
- 7.
Other models for overarching framing effects include, for example, the concept of post-normal science by Funtowicz and Ravetz (1991).
- 8.
Kuhn refers to the prospect theory, developed by Kahneman and Tversky (1979), as well as to the decision-making model by Einhorn and Hogarth (1985) who introduced the individual attitude towards vagueness and its implications on the decision-making process (described as an overarching gain/loss framing effect).
- 9.
See Weingart (2005) for a detailed analysis of the increased orientation of science towards the media.
- 10.
See Rödder and Schäfer (2010) for a brief introduction into ongoing debates about mediatization.
- 11.
Patt and Schrag showed this in an experiment, which used the Third Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). They finally asked if the IPCC intentionally misused wording to lead readers to underestimate the probability of high-magnitude possible outcomes (Patt and Schrag 2003).
- 12.
- 13.
A comprehensive review of extant literature, for example, on the relation between color and psychological functioning can be found in Elliot et al. (2007).
- 14.
For a brief summary of various researches on the effects of graphic visualization for risk and uncertainty communication , see Bostrom et al. (2008).
- 15.
- 16.
Additional cases of uncertainty include fuzzy uncertainty or hybrid uncertainty (Warren 2007) and other approaches to classify uncertainty.
References
Bostrom A, Anselin L, Farris J (2008) Visualizing seismic risk and uncertainty: a review of related research. In: Tucker WT, Ferson S, Finkel A, Long TF, Slavin D, Wright P (eds) Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1128, Strategies for risk communication evolution, evidence, experience. Wiley-Blackwell, Boston, pp 22–40
Bresciani S, Eppler MJ (2008) The risk of visualization: a classification of disadvantages associated with graphic representations of information. ICS Working paper #1/2008, http://www.knowledge-communication.org/pdf/bresciani-eppler-risks-visualization-wpaper-08.pdf. Accessed 23 Oct 2014
Cameron FR (2012) Climate change, agencies and the museum and science centre sector. Mus Manag Curatorship 27(4):317–339
Cho CH, Martens ML, Kim H, Rodrigue M (2011) Astroturfing global warming: it isn’t always greener on the other side of the fence. J Bus Ethics 104(4):571–587. doi:10.1007/s10551-011-0950-6
Chow CC, Sarin RK (2002) Known, unknown, and unknowable uncertainties. Theor Decis 52:127–138
Cox JR (2010) Beyond frames: recovering the strategic in climate communication. Environ Comm 4(1):122–133. doi:10.1080/17524030903516555
Einhorn HJ, Hogarth RM (1985) Ambiguity and uncertainty in probabilistic inference. Psychol Rev 92:433–461
Elliot AJ, Friedmann R, Moller AC, Maier MA, Meinhartd J (2007) Color and psychological functioning: the effects of red on performance attainment. J Exp Psychol Gen 136(1):154–168
Finkel AM (2008) Perceiving other’s perception of risk: Still a task for sisyphus. In: Tucker WT, Ferson S, Finkel A, Long TF, Slavin D, Wright P (eds) Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1128 Strategies for risk communication evolution, evidence, experience. Wiley-Blackwell, Boston, pp 121–137
Fischhoff B (2013) Communicating uncertainty: fulfilling the duty to inform, Social Science and Environmental Policy, Issues in Science and Technology, 2013. http://issues.org/28-4/fischhoff/. Accessed 16 Jul 2014
Frisch D, Baron J (1988) Ambiguity and rationality. J Behav Decis Mak 1:149–157
Funtowicz S, Ravetz J (1991) A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues. In: Constanza R (ed) The ecological economics. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 137–152
Gifford R, Comeau LA (2011) Message framing influences perceived climate change competence, engagement, and behavioral intentions. Glob Environ Chang 21(4):1301–1307. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.06.004
Gigerenzer G (2002) Calculated risk: how to know when numbers deceive you. Simon & Schuster, New York
Hochpöchler U, Schnotz W, Rasch T, Ullrich M, Horz H, McElvany N, Baumert J (2013) Dynamics of mental model construction from text and graphics. Eur J Psychol Educ 28(9):1105–1126. doi:10.1007/s10212-012-0156-z
Hodge B (2011) Climate chance and the museum sector: 10 reflections from the ‘Hot Science, Global Citizens’ symposium. Blog-post, retrieved from: http://www.uws.edu.au/ics/news_and_media/blog/180511. Accessed 16 Jul 2014
Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–292
Kuhn KM (1997) Communicating uncertainty: framing effects on responses to vague probabilities. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 71(1):555–583
Kurz-Milcke E, Gigerenzer G, Martignon L (2008) Transparency in risk communication: graphical and analog tools. In: Tucker WT, Ferson S, Finkel A, Long TF, Slavin D, Wright P (eds) Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1128 Strategies for risk communication evolution, evidence, experience. Wiley-Blackwell, Boston
Lofstedt R, Cvetkovich G (1999) Social trust and the management of risk. Earthscan, London
Manning MR (2003) The difficulty of communicating uncertainty. Clim Change 61:1–8
May R (2001) Risk and uncertainty: at the frontier of science, we don’t always know what may happen. Nature 411:891
Nisbet MC (2009) Communicating climate change: why frames matter for public engagement. Environ Sci and Policy Sustain Dev 51(2):12–23. doi:10.3200/ENVT.51.2.12-23
Patt AG, Schrag DP (2003) Using specific language to describe risk and probability. Clim Change 61:17–30
Peters E (2008) Numeracy and the perception and communication of risk. In: Tucker WT, Ferson S, Finkel A, Long TF, Slavin D, Wright P (eds) Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1128 Strategies for risk communication evolution, evidence, experience. Wiley-Blackwell, Boston
Reber BH, Berger BK (2005) Framing analysis of activist rhetoric: how the Sierra Club succeeds or fails at creating salient messages. Public Relat Rev 31(2):185–195. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2005.02.020
Rödder S, Schäfer MS (2010) Repercussion and resistance: an empirical study on the interrelation between science and mass media. Communications 35:249–267. doi:10.1515/COMM.2010.014
Ropeik D, Gray G (2002) RISK: a practical guide for deciding what’s really safe and what’s really dangerous in the world around you. Houghton Mifflin, New York
Schmälzle R, Häcker F, Renner B, Honey CJ, Schupp HT (2013) Neural correlates of risk perception during real-life risk communication. J Neurosci 33(25):10340–10347
Slovic P (2011) The perception of risk. Science New Series AAAS 236(4799):280–285
Stirling A (2008) Science, precaution, and the politics of technological risk: converging implications in evolutionary and social science perspectives, Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1128 Strategies for risk communication evolution, evidence, experience. Wiley-Blackwell, Boston
Thompson KM (2002) Variability and uncertainty meet risk management and risk communication. Risk Anal 22(3):647–654
Tucker WT, Ferson S (2008) Strategies for risk communication: evolution, evidence experience. In: Tucker WT, Ferson S, Finkel A, Long TF, Slavin D, Wright P (eds) Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1128 Strategies for risk communication evolution, evidence, experience. Wiley-Blackwell, Boston
Merriam-Webster. www.merriam-webster.com. Accessed 1 Jul 2014
Walker WE, Harremoes P, Rotmans J, van der Sluijs JP, van Asselt MBA, Janssen P, Krayer von Kraus MP (2003) Defining uncertainty: a conceptual basis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support. Integr Assess 4(1):5–17
Wang X-T (2008) Risk communication and risky choice in context: ambiguity and ambivalence hypothesis. In: Tucker WT, Ferson S, Finkel A, Long TF, Slavin D, Wright P (eds) Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1128 Strategies for risk communication evolution, evidence, experience. Wiley-Blackwell, Boston
Warren L (2007) On modelling hybrid uncertainty in information. Command and Control Division, DSTO Defense Science and Technology Organisation, Department of Defence, Australia. http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA467752. Accessed 16 Jul 2014
Weingart P (2005) Die wissenschaft der öffentlichkeit. Velbrück, [The science of the public] Weilerswist, Germany
Webster M (2003) Communicating climate change uncertainty to policy-makers and the public. Clim Change 61:1–8
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schneider, S. (2016). Communicating Uncertainty: A Challenge for Science Communication. In: Drake, J., Kontar, Y., Eichelberger, J., Rupp, T., Taylor, K. (eds) Communicating Climate-Change and Natural Hazard Risk and Cultivating Resilience. Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, vol 45. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20161-0_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20161-0_17
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-20160-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-20161-0
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)