Science Communication in the Age of COVID-19

The Impact of Language Complexity on Trust in Science and Adherence to Behavioral Measures during the COVID-19 Pandemic

• Effective science communication is crucial for public health, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, as it requires citizens to adhere to multiple voluntary measures based on trust in scientific guidance.

• The use of complex language in science communication can decrease understanding of scientific findings and reduce trust in related statements and recommendations.

• Low trust in science is associated with low acceptance of a wide range of scientific information, such as statements on evolution, climate change, and vaccination.

• The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of trust in science for public adherence to COVID-19 prevention measures.

• The use of plain language in science communication can positively affect text comprehension, recall, and message persuasion, and can help raise trust in the conveyed information and related people and organizations.

• Language barriers can have detrimental effects on people's trust in health information from the media, and academic language with many scientific terms, abstract concepts, and sophisticated structures can be seen as complex to lay people.

• Lower linguistic complexity can decrease the social exclusion of linguistically marginalized groups and help increase their engagement with the message.

• People with a strong conspiracy mentality tend to have less trust in powerful information sources, such as experts or scientists, and to report an increased credibility of powerless information sources, such as lay bloggers.

• Belief in conspiracy theories predicts opposition to general scientific findings, including those regarding genetically modified foods, vaccination, and climate change.

• Experiences of social exclusion lead to increased endorsement of conspiracy theories, and belief in conspiracy theories increases the vulnerability to existential threats.

• People with a high conspiracy mentality are likely to perceive a scientific text as complex and interpret text complexity as a cue for group membership that expels them.

• Negative effects of text complexity on trust in information and its sources, and hinder adherence to behavioral measures, were present only for participants with a strong conspiracy mentality.The Effect of Text Complexity on Trust, Adherence, and Social Exclusion in the Context of Mask-Wearing during COVID-19 Pandemic: An Experimental Study

• Text complexity has been shown to affect people's trust in scientific messages and adherence to behavioral recommendations, but its effect on social exclusion is unclear.

• Participants with high conspiracy mentality react more strongly to messages with high complexity, leading to feelings of social exclusion and immediate rejection.

• An experimental design was used to test the effect of scientific statements' linguistic complexity on readers' trust in the message, trust in science, and adherence to behavioral recommendations linked to these statements in the context of mask-wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

• Two short texts on mask-wearing were composed, containing almost identical content that was expressed in either simple or complex language.

• A pretest was conducted to ensure that the subjective complexity varied as intended, and a final sample of 107 participants was used for the main study.

• The simpler text was evaluated as easier to read and understand, but there was no significant difference in reading time between the simple and complex texts.

• The main study aimed to establish the effects of text complexity on trust in the message and science, as well as adherence to the message via social exclusion, using a sample of 605 adult US citizens.

• The effect of text complexity on the hypothesized mediator, social exclusion, was not significant, but the interaction of text complexity and conspiracy mentality was significant.

• Text complexity led to higher feelings of social exclusion only for participants with high conspiracy mentality, decreasing trust in the message, adherence, and trust in science.

• The overall model explained 27% of the variation in participants' trust in the message, 18% in their reported adherence to the measure, and 4% in their trust in science.

• The significant moderated mediation index indicated that text complexity increased social exclusion and decreased trust and adherence only for participants with high conspiracy mentality.

• These findings suggest that the effect of text complexity on trust and adherence is more pronounced among participants with high conspiracy mentality, leading to feelings of social exclusion and immediate rejection.The Role of Text Complexity in Scientific Communication and Its Effect on Trust, Adherence, and Conspiracy Mentality

• The study aimed to test the effects of text complexity on trust in scientific messages and adherence to recommendations, and whether these effects were mediated by feelings of social exclusion.

• The study found that the hypothesized main effects of complex versus simple texts on trust in the message or science, nor adherence to the message, were not supported.

• However, the results indicated that the hypothesized mediation effects were present, but only for participants with a high conspiracy mentality.

• Participants with a strong conspiracy mentality felt more rejected and devalued, as well as less powerful and respected when reading the complex instead of the simple message.

• Individuals with high conspiracy mentality trusted and adhered to complex (vs. simple) texts less because complexity elicits feelings of social exclusion.

• The results indicate that using simple instead of complex language is a helpful way to reach and influence individuals with a high conspiracy mentality.

• The study highlights the importance of considering personality variables as important factors for information processing in science and health communication.

• Fluency, the ease with which a text can be processed, enhances its liking, perceived truthfulness, and trustworthiness, and can affect adherence to messages.

• The study suggests that expressing findings and recommendations in a less complex way seems to be a promising way to reach individuals with a high conspiracy mindset.

• The study also highlights the importance of improving science communication to engage the audience with scientific findings and increase scientific literacy.

• The study's main limitation is that both the moderators and mediators were collected in the cross-section of a study, and future studies are needed to replicate the obtained result patterns.

• The study was supported by a Seedcorn grant awarded by the European Association of Social Psychology and China Scholarship Council, and Magdalena Formanowicz's contribution was funded by the OPUS 19 grant of the Polish National Science Center.Communication of Scientific Uncertainty on Face Masks in COVID-19

• The article discusses the communication of scientific uncertainty on face masks in the context of policy-making during the COVID-19 pandemic.

• The authors argue that scientists and politicians have different communication styles, which can affect public perception and compliance with policies.

• Scientific uncertainty can arise due to various factors, such as limited data, conflicting evidence, or evolving knowledge.

• Scientists tend to communicate uncertainty more explicitly and transparently, using caveats, probabilities, and alternative explanations.

• Politicians, on the other hand, tend to simplify and polarize messages, emphasizing certainty, urgency, and partisan values.

• The authors suggest that these different styles can create cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias, motivated reasoning, or heuristic processing, that influence how people process and interpret information.

• The authors provide empirical evidence from previous studies on conspiracy theories, message complexity, and social comparisons to support their argument.

• The authors suggest that effective communication of scientific uncertainty should consider the audience's cognitive and motivational factors, such as their need for cognition, prior knowledge, and cultural values.

• The authors also suggest that policymakers should collaborate with scientists to ensure accurate and consistent communication of scientific uncertainty, and to avoid politicization or misinformation.

• The authors acknowledge some limitations of their study, such as the focus on face masks only, the lack of direct empirical evidence, and the potential biases of their own perspectives.

• The authors conclude that communication of scientific uncertainty is a complex and crucial issue for policymakers and scientists, and that interdisciplinary research and dialogue are needed to address it effectively.

• The authors provide their own backgrounds and research interests to show their expertise and relevance to the topic.