Progress in science is often marked by studies that report similar results and studies that report conflicting results. Yet, media coverage of scientific findings often underscores conflict and controversy—a tendency that is particularly true of issues related to health or the environment, and something that has been evident in recent discussions of reproducibility in the sciences. What happens when we are exposed to conflicting scientific information? Does it lead us to be more engaged with this information? Does it make us feel overwhelmed by the information and less trustful of both science and the media that reports on it? Join us for a conversation about these issues and ongoing research designed to help us map what happens when we think about and discuss conflicting scientific information.
Natalie Clare Herbert (Earth Systems Science and Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University)
Rebekah H. Nagler, (Hubbard School of Journalism & Mass Communication, University of Minnesota)
Alexander J. Rothman (Psychology, University of Minnesota)
Hosted by Minnesota Center for Philosophy of Science at the University of Minnesota