Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 3 Feb 2025 |
Abstract
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
2025.
Research output: Working paper/Preprint › Preprint
}
TY - UNPB
T1 - The Role of Research Process Presentations in Science Education
T2 - Perceptions of Credibility and Tentativeness in Research Findings
AU - Thomas, Julia Cathérine
AU - Düsing, Katharina
AU - van den Bogaert, Vanessa
AU - Greving, Hannah
AU - Bruckermann, Till
AU - Schumann, Anke
AU - Brandt, Miriam
AU - Lewanzik, Daniel
AU - Voigt, Christian
AU - Kimmerle, Joachim
PY - 2025/2/3
Y1 - 2025/2/3
N2 - Laypeople often struggle to understand the provisional nature of scientific knowledge. While scientific knowledge may be widely accepted within the scientific community, it is continually subject to revision and further development as new studies are published. These characteristics of science, where findings build upon each other over time rather than being entirely replaced by new discoveries, are not always well understood by the public. This becomes particularly problematic when research process presentations that emphasize the evolving, provisional nature of scientific knowledge are perceived as less credible, reinforcing misconceptions about the integrity and nature of science. In two experimental online studies on science education (n1 = 99; n2 = 184), we examined how different representations of the scientific process affect perceptions of credibility and tentativeness using text- and video-based presentations in the context of bat ecology as an example. In both studies, we varied the presentation of scientific practices (without explanations vs. with explanations) and the portrayal of the scientist’s deliberations (canonized vs. authentic). Our findings indicate that, although scientific knowledge is perceived as provisional, the way it is communicated can influence its perceived credibility. In both studies, perceived tentativeness was negatively correlated with perceived credibility, highlighting a challenge in science communication: the need to convey the evolving nature of scientific knowledge without undermining trust in its reliability.
AB - Laypeople often struggle to understand the provisional nature of scientific knowledge. While scientific knowledge may be widely accepted within the scientific community, it is continually subject to revision and further development as new studies are published. These characteristics of science, where findings build upon each other over time rather than being entirely replaced by new discoveries, are not always well understood by the public. This becomes particularly problematic when research process presentations that emphasize the evolving, provisional nature of scientific knowledge are perceived as less credible, reinforcing misconceptions about the integrity and nature of science. In two experimental online studies on science education (n1 = 99; n2 = 184), we examined how different representations of the scientific process affect perceptions of credibility and tentativeness using text- and video-based presentations in the context of bat ecology as an example. In both studies, we varied the presentation of scientific practices (without explanations vs. with explanations) and the portrayal of the scientist’s deliberations (canonized vs. authentic). Our findings indicate that, although scientific knowledge is perceived as provisional, the way it is communicated can influence its perceived credibility. In both studies, perceived tentativeness was negatively correlated with perceived credibility, highlighting a challenge in science communication: the need to convey the evolving nature of scientific knowledge without undermining trust in its reliability.
U2 - 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5872938/v1
DO - 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5872938/v1
M3 - Preprint
BT - The Role of Research Process Presentations in Science Education
ER -