- Oxford Library of Psychology
- Oxford Library of Psychology
- About the Editors
- Introduction: Why Science Communication?
- The Need for a Science of Science Communication: Communicating Science’s Values and Norms
- Overview of the Science of Science Communication
- On the Sources of Ordinary Science Knowledge and Extraordinary Science Ignorance
- How Changing Media Structures Are Affecting Science News Coverage
- What the Public Thinks and Knows About Science—and Why It Matters
- Science Controversies: Can the Science of Science Communication Provide Management Guidance or Only Analysis?
- A Recap: The Science of Communicating Science
- Science as “Broken” Versus Science as “Self-Correcting”: How Retractions and Peer-Review Problems Are Exploited to Attack Science
- Publication Bias in Science: What Is It, Why Is It Problematic, and How Can It Be Addressed?
- Statistical Biases in Science Communication: What We Know About Them and How They Can Be Addressed
- Is There a Hype Problem in Science? If So, How Is It Addressed?
- Is There a Retraction Problem? And, If So, What Can We Do About It?
- A Recap: Identifying and Overcoming Challenges to Science Featured in Attacks on Science
- A Comparative Study of Communication About Food Safety Before, During, and After the “Mad Cow” Crisis
- Cross-National Comparative Communication and Deliberation About the Risks of Nanotechnologies
- Communications About Biotechnologies and GMOs Across Europe
- A Tale of Two Vaccines—and Their Science Communication Environments
- A Recap: Science Communication in Action
- Science Communication at Scientific Institutions
- The Role of Scholarly Presses and Journals
- The Role of Governmental Organizations in Communicating About Regulating Science
- Science Communication and Museums’ Changing Roles
- The Role of Funding Organizations: Foundations
- Promoting Popular Understanding of Science and Health Through Social Networks
- Designing Public Deliberation at the Intersection of Science and Public Policy
- Translating Science into Policy and Legislation: Evidence-Informed Policymaking
- A Recap—The Role of Intermediaries in Communicating Science: A Synthesis
- The (Changing) Nature of Scientist–Media Interactions: A Cross-National Analysis
- New Models of Knowledge-Based Journalism
- Citizens Making Sense of Science Issues: Supply and Demand Factors for Science News and Information in the Digital Age
- The Changing Popular Images of Science
- What Do We Know About the Entertainment Industry’s Portrayal of Science? How Does It Affect Public Attitudes Toward Science?
- How Narrative Functions in Entertainment to Communicate Science
- Assumptions About Science in Satirical News and Late-Night Comedy
- A Recap: The Role, Power, and Peril of Media for the Communication of Science
- Countering False Beliefs: An Analysis of the Evidence and Recommendations of Best Practices for the Retraction and Correction of Scientific Misinformation
- Using Frames to Make Scientific Communication More Effective
- Philosophical Impediments to Citizens’ Use of Science
- Overcoming Confirmation and Blind Spot Biases When Communicating Science
- Understanding and Overcoming Selective Exposure and Judgment When Communicating About Science
- Overcoming Innumeracy and the Use of Heuristics When Communicating Science
- Overcoming Biases in Processing of Time Series Data About Climate
- Understanding and Overcoming Fear of the Unnatural in Discussion of GMOs
- Protecting or Polluting the Science Communication Environment?: The Case of Childhood Vaccines
- Overcoming False Causal Attribution: Debunking the MMR–Autism Association
- Overcoming the Challenges of Communicating Uncertainties Across National Contexts
- A Recap: Heuristics, Biases, Values, and Other Challenges to Communicating Science
- Conclusion—On the Horizon: The Changing Science Communication Environment
Abstract and Keywords
Although false beliefs about science are at the core of theory and practice in the field of scientific communication, correction and retraction of misinformation entail a complex and difficult process. This chapter first provides a review of trends in scientific retraction and correction notes failures in the fundamental communicative function of signaling that a published finding has been invalidated. It describes the recent practical communication developments that are increasing the transparency and visibility of retractions and corrections of fraudulent or incorrect scientific findings and examines the final barrier to correction of misbelief: the continued influence effect. The chapter reviews the results of a meta-analysis of the continued influence effect and present psychology-based recommendations in the form of decision trees to guide the work of scientists and practitioners and provides eight best practice recommendations for science communication scholars and practitioners as they continue their battle against misinformation.
Man-pui Sally Chan, PhD, has a background in information systems and received her doctoral degree in psychology. She has been a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Cambridge and is currently a research associate at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Dr. Chan’s interests are in incorporating the data science approach to address social and health psychology research questions and examining the influences of social media on individuals’ beliefs and attitudes as well as mental and physical well-being in various settings (e.g., by conducting meta-analyses and laboratory experiments).
Christopher Jones majored in psychology at Miami University and obtained his PhD in social psychology at The Ohio State University with his mentor Russ Fazio. Much of Dr. Jones’s work has concerned attitude change and has often fallen at the intersection of social cognition and mental health. His postdoctoral work at the Annenberg Public Policy Center involved a meta-analysis of experiments on the lingering, pernicious effects of misinformation even after retraction and/or correction.
Dolores Albarracín is a professor of psychology and business at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She studies attitudes, motivation, and behavior change, in relation to both basic psychological processes and applications to health promotion. She is the lead editor of the Handbook of Attitudes, a coeditor on a behavior-prediction book, and the author of approximately 130 journal articles and chapters. Dr. Albarracín serves on several national and international committees, including the National Institutes of Health Behavioral and Social Science Approaches to Preventing HIV/AIDS Study Section.
Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.