Climate scientists set the bar of proof too high.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Supplementary information
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10584-021-03061-9.
SUBMITTER: Lloyd EA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8054254 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Climate negotiation outcomes are difficult to evaluate objectively because there are no clear reference scenarios. Subjective assessments from those directly involved in the negotiations are particularly important, as this may influence strategy and future negotiation participation. Here we analyze the perceived success of the climate negotiations in a sample of more than 600 experts involved in international climate policy. Respondents were pessimistic when asked for specific assessments of the current approach centered on voluntary pledges, but were more optimistic when asked for general assessments of the outcomes and usefulness of the climate negotiations. Individuals who are more involved in the negotiation process tended to be more optimistic, especially in terms of general assessments. Our results indicate that two reinforcing effects are at work: a high degree of involvement changes individuals' perceptions and more optimistic individuals are more inclined to remain involved in the negotiations.
| S-EPMC5458137 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Climate scientists face many challenges when it comes to communicating their work to the public, yet it is largely unknown how junior climate scientists give meaning to their role as science communicators. Therefore, the current research conducted five focus group discussions with Dutch junior climate scientists, which were structured around the following themes: (a) common barriers; (b) climate advocacy; (c) message content; and (d) climate skepticism, misinformation, and incivility. The results reveal the motivations and barriers for junior climate scientists to do science communication. New barriers were identified relating to participants' lack of seniority, meaning a self-attributed lack of expertise and not having established their scientific credentials yet, providing evidence for the imposter syndrome. Furthermore, many participants alluded to the information-deficit model and indicated they do not know where to start with science communication. Overall, the findings show uncertainty, which could be mitigated by media training and institutionalized incentives.
| S-EPMC10631269 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDifferences in the muscular activity between the high-bar back squat (HBBS) and the low-bar back squat (LBBS) on the same representative group of experienced powerlifters are still scarcely investigated. The main purpose of the study was to compare the normalized bioelectrical activity and maximal angles within single homogeneous group between the HBBS and LBBS for 60% one repetition maximum (1RM), 65% 1RM and 70% 1RM.MethodsTwelve healthy men (age 24.3 ± 2.8 years, height 178.8 ± 5.6 cm, body mass 88.3 ± 11.5 kg), experienced in powerlifting performed HBBS and LBBS with comparable external loads equal 60% 1RM, 65% 1RM, and 70% 1RM. Electromyography (EMG) signals of muscle groups were synchronously recorded alongside kinematic data (joints angle) by means of a motion capture system.ResultsEMG activity during eccentric phase of squat motion were significantly higher during LBBS than in HBBS for all selected muscles (60% 1RM and 65% 1RM) (p < 0.05). All examined muscles were more activated during concentric phase of the squat cycle (p < 0.05). In the concentric phase, significant differences between the loads were generally not observed between just 5% 1RM change in load level for LBBS.ConclusionsOur results confirmed significant differences in muscles activation between both squat techniques. Muscle activity during eccentric phase of squat motion were significantly higher during LBBS than HBBS. The differences are crucial for posterior muscle chain during eccentric phase of squat cycle.
| S-EPMC7289144 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the United States, a public debate remains about the existence and effects of anthropogenic climate change. This skepticism is present in the agricultural sector, rendering climate science communication challenging. Due to the polarization of climate change issues and the concurrent need for agricultural adaptation, we sought to examine how scientists communicate in this sector. A survey, administered to climate scientists and pertinent U.S. federal agency staff (response rate = 43%), was conducted to examine perspectives on communicating with five agricultural stakeholder groups: agribusinesses, crop advisors, general public, producers, and policymakers. We focused on three aspects of the communication process with these stakeholders to evaluate if scientists, as messengers, were following best practices-communicator training, knowledge of stakeholder, and terminology use. We found scientists valued communication training; however, the majority had not attended formal training. Scientists had different views on climate change than producers and crop advisors but understood their perspective and were deliberate with their communication with different audiences. This suggests stakeholder knowledge and terminology use do not hinder communication between scientist and stakeholder. We also highlight three communication challenges present across stakeholder groups-stakeholder knowledge, timescale, and scientific uncertainty-and others that were specific to each stakeholder group. Future research should support scientists by identifying and resolving barriers to training and effective communication strategies for each stakeholder group that addresses these challenges.
| S-EPMC9345487 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Scientific issues requiring urgent societal actions-such as climate change-have increased the need for communication and interaction between scientists and other societal actors. Social media platforms facilitate such exchanges. This study investigates who scientists interact with on Twitter, and whether their communication differs when engaging with actors beyond the scientific community. We focus on the climate change debate on Twitter and combine network analysis with automated content analysis. The results show that scientists interact most intensively with their peers, but also communication beyond the scientific community is important. The findings suggest that scientists adjust their communication style to their audience: They use more neutral language when communicating with other scientists, and more words expressing negative emotions when communicating with journalists, civil society, and politicians. Likewise, they stress certainty more when communicating with politicians, indicating that scientists use language strategically when communicating beyond the scientific community.
| S-EPMC7323776 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We juxtapose 386 prominent contrarians with 386 expert scientists by tracking their digital footprints across ?200,000 research publications and ?100,000 English-language digital and print media articles on climate change. Projecting these individuals across the same backdrop facilitates quantifying disparities in media visibility and scientific authority, and identifying organization patterns within their association networks. Here we show via direct comparison that contrarians are featured in 49% more media articles than scientists. Yet when comparing visibility in mainstream media sources only, we observe just a 1% excess visibility, which objectively demonstrates the crowding out of professional mainstream sources by the proliferation of new media sources, many of which contribute to the production and consumption of climate change disinformation at scale. These results demonstrate why climate scientists should increasingly exert their authority in scientific and public discourse, and why professional journalists and editors should adjust the disproportionate attention given to contrarians.
| S-EPMC6692310 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This research explores whether environmental scientists perceive their male and female peers differently when making statements in the media including policy advocacy. Environmental scientists in the United Kingdom were provided with a media statement by a fictitious scientist containing a mixture of scientific information and advocacy, and asked to rate the statement against various attributes. Attributes were designed to represent stereotypes associated with male and female tendencies, and with science (impartial objectivity) and the media (dramatic narrative). The statements were randomly assigned to one of two male and two female scientists. Where the statements were attributed to a female scientist, male environmental scientists rated the fictitious scientist as significantly more 'dramatic' and 'biased' than their female counterparts did. These gendered attributes are typically held as contrary to the norms of science, suggesting an implicit bias among male scientists when reviewing their female peers' media statements.
| S-EPMC8488648 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Transfection by means of non-viral gene delivery vectors is the cornerstone of modern gene delivery. Despite the resources poured into the development of ever more effective transfectants, improvement is still slow and limited. Of note, the performance of any gene delivery vector in vitro is strictly dependent on several experimental conditions specific to each laboratory. The lack of standard tests has thus largely contributed to the flood of inconsistent data underpinning the reproducibility crisis. A way researchers seek to address this issue is by gauging the effectiveness of newly synthesized gene delivery vectors with respect to benchmarks of seemingly well-known behavior. However, the performance of such reference molecules is also affected by the testing conditions. This survey points to non-standardized transfection settings and limited information on variables deemed relevant in this context as the major cause of such misalignments. This review provides a catalog of conditions optimized for the gold standard and internal reference, 25 kDa polyethyleneimine, that can be profitably replicated across studies for the sake of comparison. Overall, we wish to pave the way for the implementation of standardized protocols in order to make the evaluation of the effectiveness of transfectants as unbiased as possible.
| S-EPMC7076396 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Residents in rural Kentucky (KY) and suburban Ohio (OH) expressed concerns about radon exposure and lung cancer. Although 85% of lung cancer cases are caused by tobacco smoke, radon exposure accounts for 10-15% of lung cancer cases. Academic and community members from the University of KY and the University of Cincinnati developed and pilot-tested a family-centered, youth-engaged home radon testing toolkit. The radon toolkit included radon information, and how to test, interpret, and report back findings. We educated youth as citizen scientists and their teachers in human subjects protection and home radon testing using the toolkit in the classroom. Youth citizen scientists explained the study to their parents and obtained informed consent. One hundred students were trained in human subjects protection, 27 had parental permission to be citizen scientists, and 18 homeowners completed surveys. Radon values ranged from < 14.8 Bq/m3 to 277.5 Bq/m3. Youth were interested and engaged in citizen science and this family-centered, school-based project provided a unique opportunity to further the healthy housing and quality education components of the Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. Further research is needed to test the impact of student-led, family-centered citizen science projects in environmental health as part of school curricula.
| S-EPMC7763282 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sea surface temperature (SST) is an essential climate variable, that is directly used in climate monitoring. Although satellite measurements can offer continuous global coverage, obtaining a long-term homogeneous satellite-derived SST data set suitable for climate studies based on a single instrument is still a challenge. In this work, we assess a homogeneous SST data set derived from reprocessed Infrared Atmospheric Sounding Interferometer (IASI) level-1 (L1C) radiance data. The SST is computed using Planck's Law and simple atmospheric corrections. We assess the data set using the ERA5 reanalysis and the EUMETSAT-released IASI level-2 SST product. Over the entire period, the reprocessed IASI SST shows a mean global difference with ERA5 close to zero, a mean absolute bias under 0.5°C, with a SD of difference around 0.3°C and a correlation coefficient over 0.99. In addition, the reprocessed data set shows a stable bias and SD, which is an advantage for climate studies. The interannual variability and trends were compared with other SST data sets: ERA5, Hadley Centre's SST (HadISST), and NOAA's Optimal Interpolation SST Analysis (OISSTv2). We found that the reprocessed SST data set is able to capture the patterns of interannual variability well, showing the same areas of high interannual variability (>1.5°C), including over the tropical Pacific in January corresponding to the El Niño Southern Oscillation. Although the period studied is relatively short, we demonstrate that the IASI data set reproduces the same trend patterns found in the other data sets (i.e., cooling trend in the North Atlantic, warming trend over the Mediterranean).
| S-EPMC8243959 | biostudies-literature