When does science persuade (or not persuade) in high‐conflict policy contexts?
Time:2020-10-20 Views:

When does science persuade (or not persuade) in highconflict policy contexts?

AuthorTanya Heikkila  Christopher M. Weible  Andrea K. Gerlak

Abstract

Researchers struggle to understand the relationship between science and policy positions, especially the complicated interplay among the various factors that might affect the acceptance or rejection of scientific information. This article presents a typology that simplifies and guides research linking scientific information to policy positions. We use the typology to examine how characteristics of both scientific information and policy actors' existing policy positions affect the likelihood of changing, maintaining or reinforcing those policy positions. We analyse data from surveys conducted in 2015 and 2017 of policy actors engaged in contested policy debates over shale oil and gas development in Colorado, US. Our findings confirm expectations that policy actors will most likely maintain and reinforce their policy positions in response to scientific information. Our data also show that changes in policy positions depend on policy actors' risk perceptions, perceived issue contentiousness, networks and experience with science.

  

The emotive effect of government branding on citizens' trust and its boundaries: Does the personal relevance of the policy issue matter?

AuthorSaar AlonBarkat

Abstract

Recent studies have demonstrated the potency of government branding to enhance citizens' trust in government organizations and policies. In addition, studies have pointed to the detrimental implications of this emotive effect, mainly its ability to compensate for organizations' poor functioning, and accordingly to elicit undue trust. In light of these concerns, this study explores the boundaries of governments' persuasion of citizens through branding and symbolic communications. Building on social psychology and marketing research, I hypothesize that citizens are less susceptible to persuasion by branding the more they perceive the policy issue as personally relevant. I test this expectation through a survey experiment, focused on air pollution policy in Israel, exploiting the natural variation in the perceived personal relevance between citizens residing in a polluted area in the country and others. The results indicate that even high levels of perceived personal relevance do not attenuate

the effect of symbolic brand elements. This means that the boundaries of persuasion and manipulation through branding are wider than expected.

sourcePublic Administration Volume 98, Issue 3