Science Communication and the Problematic Impact of Descriptive Norms

British Journal for Philosophy of Science (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX


When scientists or science reporters communicate research results to the public, this often involves ethical and epistemic risks. One such a risk arises when scientific claims cause cognitive or behavioral changes in the audience that contribute to the self-fulfillment of these claims. Focusing on such effects, I argue that the ethical and epistemic problem that they pose is likely to be much broader than hitherto appreciated. Moreover, it is often due to a psychological phenomenon that has been neglected in the research on science communication, namely that many people tend to conform to descriptive norms, that is, norms capturing (perceptions of) what others commonly do, think, or feel. Because of this tendency, science communication can produce significant social harm. I contend that scientists have a responsibility to assess the risk of this potential harm and consider adopting strategies to mitigate it. I introduce one such a strategy and argue that its implementation is independently well motivated by the fact that it helps improve scientific accuracy.



External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Epistemic Norms of Intra-Scientific Testimony.Mikkel Gerken - 2015 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 45 (6):568-595.
Epistemic Norms as Social Norms.David Henderson & Peter Graham - 2019 - In Miranda Fricker, Peter Graham, David Henderson & Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding Pedersen (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Social Epistemology. New York, USA: Routledge. pp. 425-436.
Science and Ethics Some of the Main Principles and Problems.Knut Erik Tranøy - 1987 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 30 (1):11-23.
Ad Hominem Arguments, Rhetoric, and Science Communication.Carlo Martini - 2018 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 55 (1):151-166.
Science and Ethics Some of the Main Principles and Problems.Knut Erik Tranøy - 1987 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 30 (1):11-23.
Philosophy of Science for Science Communication in Twenty-Two Questions.Gregor Betz & David Lanius - 2020 - In Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal & Thomas Gloning (eds.), Science Communication. pp. 3-28.


Added to PP

481 (#20,807)

6 months
90 (#7,936)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Uwe Peters
Universität Bonn

Citations of this work

What Should Scientists Do About (Harmful) Interactive Effects?Caterina Marchionni & Marion Godman - 2022 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 12 (4):1-16.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal.Heather Douglas - 2009 - University of Pittsburgh Press.
The Weirdest People in the World?Joseph Henrich, Steven J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2-3):61-83.
The Structure of Science.Ernest Nagel - 1961 - Les Etudes Philosophiques 17 (2):275-275.

View all 19 references / Add more references