Fostering Trust in Science and Combatting Misinformation Through Participatory Science Communication: A Pre-Registered Experiment

Scientific knowledge is crucial in tackling pressing global challenges, including climate change and public health crises. As this knowledge increasingly shapes policymaking, effective communication becomes essential for fostering public consensus and support. However, such support is more difficult to obtain as we live in an era of growing polarization in trust towards scientific expertise. Once a relatively minor issue, political divisions around trust in science have widened considerably, creating a fertile ground for ideologically driven narratives and misinformation. This presents an important challenge to science communication. Given that a significant factor driving skepticism towards science may be the perception of scientists as untrustworthy, it is crucial that communication of science not only conveys factual information but also ensures that communicators are perceived as trustworthy and credible. This paper investigates the potential of the participatory science communication model to enhance public attitudes toward scientists and their advice, especially among the groups most susceptible to misinformation: individuals with high levels of conspiracist ideation and science-related populism. First, through a thematic analysis of existing literature on science communication models, we identify two key elements that set the participatory model apart from the traditional “deficit” approach: (1) collaboration between scientists and citizens, and (2) transparent communication of the uncertainties inherent in scientific research. Further, in a pre-registered experimental study (N=400), we assess the effect of participatory vs. deficit messages that communicate scientific advice on the perceptions of the communicators – the scientists who give this advice – along with perceived trustworthiness of their advice, willingness to follow it, and support for public policy based on it. We estimate the main effect of the participatory vs. deficit messages and its conditional effects to explore the potential of the participatory approach to counteract possible negative effects of conspiracy beliefs and science-related populism – traits associated with skepticism and low trust in science and scientists. We hypothesise that those who read the participatory message will perceive scientists as more morally grounded, will be more willing to follow their advice and will have higher level of support for public policy based on it. Moreover, we predict significant interaction effects between the approach to science communication, conspiracist ideation and science-related populism. Specifically, we expect that conspiracist ideation will negatively impact the dependent variables in the deficit condition, but the participatory message will mitigate these effects. Similarly, science-related populism will negatively impact the dependent variables in the deficit condition; however, the participatory message will mitigate these effects. The study has been pre-registered on OSF, and the data is being collected now.