1. Models of Science and Environmental Communication
Matthew C. Nisbet, Ph.D.
School of Communication
American University
Washington DC

2. The Deficit Model:
The Sputnik Fable
• There was a point in the past when the public was knowledgeable
about science and strongly supportive. Need to return to that point
in the past.

3. 1957: Is The Past That Different from Today?
Science Literacy
• 12% of the public understood the scientific approach or method.
• On basic questions tapping knowledge of polio, fluoridation,
radioactivity, and space satellites, only 1 in 6 could answer all four
questions correctly.
• Only 38% knew that the Moon was smaller than the Earth and only
4% could correctly indicate the distance in miles between the Moon
and the Earth.
Michael, D.N. (1960). The Beginning of the Space Age and Public Opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 573-582;
Withey, S.B. (1959). Public opinion about science and scientists. Public Opinion Quarterly, 382-388.

4. 1957: Is The Past That Different from Today?
Low Knowledge but Support for Science
Withey, S.B. (1959). Public opinion about science and scientists. Public Opinion Quarterly, 382-388.

5. 1957: Is The Past That Different from Today?
Perception is Reference Dependent
60
1957:
50
Looking to the
future, what 40
would you say is
the real 30
meaning of
Sputnik to us 20
here in
America? 10
0
Behind Russia, Propaganda Nothing Religious Scientific
Security significant Meaning Advancement
Michael, D.N. (1960). The Beginning of the Space Age and Public Opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 573-582;

6. 2008: Is The Past That Different from Today?
Increasing Education, Low Science Literacy
National Science Board (2008). Chapter 7: Public Attitudes about Science and Technology. Science & Engineering
Indicators.

7. 2008: Is The Past That Different from Today?
Deep Public Optimism and Trust in Science
• More than 70% of all American adults believe that the benefits of scientific
research outweigh the harmful results.
• More than 85% of Americans agree that “even if it brings no immediate
benefits, scientific research that advances the frontiers of knowledge is
necessary and should be supported by the federal government.”
• On climate change, stem cell research, and food biotechnology,
Americans believe scientists hold greater expertise, are less self
interested, and should have greater say in decisions than industry leaders,
elected officials, and/or religious leaders.
• Among institutions, only the military has greater trust than science.
Analysis of 2006 General Social Survey; National Science Board (2008). Chapter 7: Public Attitudes about Science
and Technology. Science & Engineering Indicators.

8. Early 1990s: A Paradigm Sheep?
Social Identity, Trust, and Relationships Matter
The uptake
Trust, credibility, and
Social influence of
relationships, alienation relative to
science-related “expert”
networks, and science-
identities institutions
related
knowledge
Practical reason,
localized knowledge Filtered/mediated
Bryan Wynne

9. Wynne’s Model:
Common Criteria Used to Judge Experts & Institutions
1) Does expert knowledge work? Do predictions
fail?
2) Do expert claims pay attention to other
available knowledge?
3) Are experts open to criticism? Admission of
errors, or oversights?
4) What are the social / institutional affiliations of
experts? Historical track record of
trustworthiness, affiliation with industry?
5) What issues overlap or connect to lay
experience?

10. 3. Judgments and Decisions Are Context Dependent
Kahneman, D. (2003) In T. Frängsmyr (Ed.), Les Prix Nobel: The Nobel
Prizes 2002 (pp. 449-489). Stockholm, Sweden: Nobel Foundation.

11. 3. Judgments and Decisions Are Context Dependent
Kahneman, D. (2003) In T. Frängsmyr (Ed.), Les Prix Nobel: The Nobel Prizes
2002 (pp. 449-489). Stockholm, Sweden: Nobel Foundation.

12. Maine’s Energy Future:
Supply or Innovation Problem?

13. Nisbet, Maibach, & Leiserowitz (2011). American Journal of Public Health.

14. Nisbet, Maibach, & Leiserowitz (2011). American Journal of Public Health.

15. Maine’s Climate Future:
Environmental or Health Threat?

16. Stage 1: In-Depth Interviews w/ 70 Subjects from
Six Distinct Audience Segments (Summer 2009)
Maibach, E., Nisbet, M.C. et al. (2010). BMC Public Health 10: 299.

17. Segments 4-6:
Sentence Specific Reaction To Public Health Essay
10
DISENGAGED DOUBTFUL
8
6 DISMISSIVE POPULATION
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 B1 B2 B3 B4 C1 C2
Scores reflect respondent average values by segment for the difference between the number of times
each of 18 sentences were marked “especially clear or helpful” and “especially confusing or
unhelpful.”

18. Stage 2: Testing Environmental, National
Security Frames vs. Public Health Frame
Myers, T., Nisbet, M.C., Maibach, E.W., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). A Public Health Frame
Arouses Hopeful Emotions about Climate Change. Climatic Change Research
Letters, 1105-1121.

19. Stage 2: Testing Environmental, National
Security Frames vs.
Public Health Frame
Myers, T., Nisbet, M.C., Maibach, E.W., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). A Public Health Frame
Arouses Hopeful Emotions about Climate Change. Climatic Change Research
Letters, 1105-1121.