Communicating scientific uncertainty

被引:202
作者
Fischhoff, Baruch [1 ,2 ]
Davis, Alex L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Dept Engn & Publ Policy, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
[2] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Dept Social & Decis Sci, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
science communication; expert judgment; expert elicitation; risk; mental models; SCIENCE; PROBABILITIES; RISK; CRYPTOSPORIDIOSIS; MAMMOGRAPHY; GUIDELINES; KNOWLEDGE; JUDGMENT;
D O I
10.1073/pnas.1317504111
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
All science has uncertainty. Unless that uncertainty is communicated effectively, decision makers may put too much or too little faith in it. The information that needs to be communicated depends on the decisions that people face. Are they (i) looking for a signal (e.g., whether to evacuate before a hurricane), (ii) choosing among fixed options (e.g., which medical treatment is best), or (iii) learning to create options (e.g., how to regulate nanotechnology)? We examine these three classes of decisions in terms of how to characterize, assess, and convey the uncertainties relevant to each. We then offer a protocol for summarizing the many possible sources of uncertainty in standard terms, designed to impose a minimal burden on scientists, while gradually educating those whose decisions depend on their work. Its goals are better decisions, better science, and better support for science.
引用
收藏
页码:13664 / 13671
页数:8
相关论文
共 75 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1997, NIH Consens Statement, V15, P1
[2]  
[Anonymous], SURV MEAS SUBJ PHEN
[3]  
[Anonymous], STAND ETH
[4]  
[Anonymous], REACT SAF STUD
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2001, RISK COMMUNICATION M
[6]  
[Anonymous], STRUCT APPR BEN RISK
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2011, Communicating Risks and Benefits
[8]  
[Anonymous], HURR POSTTR CYCL SAN
[9]  
[Anonymous], 1988, Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics
[10]  
[Anonymous], VERBAL PROTOCOLS DAT