Literature DB >> 23672499

Backtracking and the ethics of framing: lessons from voles and vasopressin.

Daniel J McKaughan1, Kevin C Elliott.   

Abstract

When communicating scientific information, experts often face difficult choices about how to promote public understanding while also maintaining an appropriate level of objectivity. We argue that one way for scientists and others involved in communicating scientific information to alleviate these tensions is to pay closer attention to the major frames employed in the contexts in which they work. By doing so, they can ideally employ useful frames while also enabling the recipients of information to "backtrack" to relatively uncontroversial facts and recognize how these frames relate to their own values and perspectives. Important strategies for promoting this sort of backtracking include identifying the weaknesses of particular frames, preventing misunderstanding of them, differentiating well-supported findings from more speculative claims, and acknowledging major alternative frames.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23672499     DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2013.788384

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Account Res        ISSN: 0898-9621            Impact factor:   2.622


  3 in total

1.  Shaping the Qualities, Values and Standards of Science. How Reporting Guidelines Improve the Transparency of Biomedical Research.

Authors:  Alexander Schniedermann
Journal:  Front Res Metr Anal       Date:  2022-06-27

2.  Values in environmental research: Citizens' views of scientists who acknowledge values.

Authors:  Kevin C Elliott; Aaron M McCright; Summer Allen; Thomas Dietz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Science, policy, and the transparency of values.

Authors:  Kevin C Elliott; David B Resnik
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 9.031

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.