1. Dan M. Kahan Yale University & 10^3 others www.culturalcognition.net Two science communication puzzles...

2. Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

3. N = 1,737. Annenberg Public Policy Center & Cultural Cognition Project. Nationally representative sample, April/May 2014. CIs are 0.95 confidence intervals for estimated general population means. Subjects classified in relation to “Left_Right,” a continuous political outlook scale formed by aggregating responses to 7-point party identification item and 5-point “liberal-conservative” ideology item (α = 0.78). Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

4. > avg Left_Right < avg Left_Right N = 1,737. Annenberg Public Policy Center & Cultural Cognition Project. Nationally representative sample, April/May 2014. CIs are 0.95 confidence intervals for estimated general population means. Subjects classified in relation to “Left_Right,” a continuous political outlook scale formed by aggregating responses to 7-point party identification item and 5-point “liberal-conservative” ideology item (α = 0.78). Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

5. Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

6. Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

7. Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

8. Rep. Frank Lucas (R. Okla.) Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

9. Rep. Frank Lucas (R. Okla.) Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

10. Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

11. Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

12. Climate-change resistant chicken! Puzzle No. 1: Do U.S. farmers believe in climate change?

13. Puzzle No. 2:

14. Puzzle No. 2: Do people who disbelieve in evolution like science documentaries about evolution?

15. Puzzle No. 2: Do people who disbelieve in evolution like science documentaries about evolution? N = 1012. Nationally representative sample From Kahan, D.M. Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Advances in Political Psychology 36, 1-43 (2015). True False “Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals.” (True/false)

16. The “missing audience hypothesis... ”

17. Engagement Science Curiosity

18. The “missing audience hypothesis... ” Engagement Science Curiosity

19. The “missing audience hypothesis... ” Engagement “Natural audience hypothesis” “Missing audience hypothesis” Science Curiosity ?

20. a cool show... The “missing audience hypothesis... ”

21. YIF Clip: Origins of color vision

22. The “missing audience hypothesis... ” Engagement Science Curiosity Existing audience “Missing audience”

23. The “missing audience hypothesis... ” Engagement Science Curiosity Existing audience “Missing audience”

24. Test of Science Related Attitudes (TOSRA)  I am curious about the world in which we live  I find it boring to hear about new ideas  I would enjoy visiting a science museum at the weekend  I would like to be given a science book as a present  I get bored when watching science programs on TV State of the art “Science Curiosity”/“curiosity”

25. “Science Curiosity Index” 1.Measures: mixed strategy 2.Psychometric properties 3.Validation...

26. Sample self-report item

28. Sample (self-report) behavior

30. Performance measure

31. “Science Curiosity Index” 1.Measures: mixed strategy 2.Psychometric properties 3.Validation...

32. BSCIENCE science curiosity “Science Curiosity Index” (SCI) science curiosity Read science book in last yr Visited science lecture in last yr

33. “Science Curiosity Index” 1.Measures: mixed strategy 2.Psychometric properties 3.Validation...

34. The “missing audience hypothesis... ” Engagement Science Curiosity Existing audience “Missing audience”

35. The “missing audience hypothesis... ” Engagement Science Curiosity Existing audience “Missing audience”

36. Self-report engagement

37. Behavioral engagement

40. “Ordinary Science Intelligence” Assessment (“OSI”) OSI_1.0OSI_2.0

41. “Ordinary Science Intelligence” Assessment (“OSI”)

42. -.5 0.5 1 -2012 Ordinary Science Intellience Engagement Engagement with clip: SCI vs. OSI

43. -.5 0.5 1 -2012 Engagement Ordinary Science Intellience Engagement with clip: SCI vs. OSI Science Curiosity Index

44. Engagement with clip: SCI vs. OSI SCI OSI Scale percentile Engagement -.5 0.5 1 1st16th50th84th99th Ordinary Science Intellience Science Curiosity Index bars denote 0.95 CIs

45. The “missing audience hypothesis... ” Engagement Science Curiosity Existing audience “Missing audience”

46. The “missing audience hypothesis... ” Engagement Science Curiosity Existing audience “Missing audience”

47. The “missing audience hypothesis... ” Engagement Science Curiosity Existing audience “Missing audience”

48. SCI: group “differences”...

50. M = 0.10 (0.03)M = - 0.09 (0.03)

51. Hierarchy Egalitarianism Abortion procedure Risk Perception Key Low Risk High Risk Individualism Communitarianism Environment: climate, nuclear Guns/Gun Control HPV Vaccination Gays military/gay parenting Environment: climate, nuclear hierarchical individualists hierarchical communitarians egalitarian communitariansegalitarian individualists Cultural Cognition Worldviews cats/stupid birds

53. Hierarchy Egalitarianism Individualism Communitarianism Environment: climate, nuclear Cultural Cognition Worldviews Risk Perception Key Low Risk High Risk

54. The “missing audience”????!!!!!

55. Dalets are pro-science/technology

56. Puzzle No. 2: Do people who disbelieve in evolution like science documentaries about evolution? N = 1012. Nationally representative sample From Kahan, D.M. Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Advances in Political Psychology 36, 1-43 (2015). True False “Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals.” (True/false)

57. SCI: group “differences”...

59. M = 0.10 (0.03)M = - 0.09 (0.03)

60. -.5 0.5 1 engagement -2012 Science Curiosity Engagement: Evolution “believers” vs. “disbelievers”

61. -.5 0.5 1 engagement -2012 Science Curiosity Engagement: Evolution “believers” vs. “disbelievers” Evolution believer

62. -.5 0.5 1 engagement -2012 Science Curiosity Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever Engagement: Evolution “believers” vs. “disbelievers”

63. Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever Engagement: Evolution “believers” vs. “disbelievers” shaded regeions represent 0.95 confidence zones for estimated means. Science Curiosity

64. Engagement deficit: Evolution “belief” vs. cultural style...

65. Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever Request full show: Evolution “believers” vs. “disbelievers”

66. Colored bars reflect 0.95 level of confidence Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever

67. Was the information “believable”?

68. 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity “I found the information in the documentary convincing.” “It seemed like the documentary supplied strong evidence of how humans acquired color vision.” Science Curiosity Was the information “believable”? Probability of agreeing

69. 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity “I found the information in the documentary convincing.” Evolution believer “It seemed like the documentary supplied strong evidence of how humans acquired color vision.” Science Curiosity Was the information “believable”? Probability of agreeing

70. 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity “I found the information in the documentary convincing.” Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever “It seemed like the documentary supplied strong evidence of how humans acquired color vision.” Science Curiosity Was the information “believable”? Probability of agreeing

71. OSI item response profile

73. 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity “I found the information in the documentary convincing.” Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever “It seemed like the documentary supplied strong evidence of how humans acquired color vision.” Science Curiosity Was the information “believable”? Probability of agreeing

74. 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity “I found the information in the documentary convincing.” Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever “It seemed like the documentary supplied strong evidence of how humans acquired color vision.” Science Curiosity Was the information “believable”? Probability of agreeing 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 OSI 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 OSI Ordinary Science Intelligence Probability of agreeing 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 OSI 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 OSI Ordinary Science Intelligence Probability of agreeing

75. 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 Science Curiosity “I found the information in the documentary convincing.” Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever “It seemed like the documentary supplied strong evidence of how humans acquired color vision.” Science Curiosity Was the information “believable”? Probability of agreeing 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 OSI 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 OSI Ordinary Science Intelligence Probability of agreeing 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 OSI 0.25.5.75 1 probability of agreeing -2012 OSI Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever Evolution believer Evolution disbeliever Ordinary Science Intelligence Probability of agreeing

76. SCI, OSI, Evolution disbelief & engagement

77. Prob. of requesting full documentary Puzzle No. 2: Do people who disbelieve in evolution like science documentaries about evolution?