Backtracking and the ethics of framing: lessons from voles and vasopressin.

Citation data:

Accountability in research, ISSN: 1545-5815, Vol: 20, Issue: 3, Page: 206-26

Publication Year:
2013
Usage 810
Downloads 513
Abstract Views 218
Full Text Views 77
Link-outs 2
Captures 11
Exports-Saves 11
Social Media 1
Tweets 1
Citations 7
Citation Indexes 7
Repository URL:
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/10028
PMID:
23672499
DOI:
10.1080/08989621.2013.788384
Author(s):
McKaughan, Daniel J, Elliott, Kevin C
Publisher(s):
Informa UK Limited, Taylor and Francis
Tags:
Social Sciences
Most Recent Tweet View All Tweets
article description
When communicating scientific information, experts often face difficult choices about how to promote public understanding while also maintaining an appropriate level of objectivity. We argue that one way for scientists and others involved in communicating scientific information to alleviate these tensions is to pay closer attention to the major frames employed in the contexts in which they work. By doing so, they can ideally employ useful frames while also enabling the recipients of information to "backtrack" to relatively uncontroversial facts and recognize how these frames relate to their own values and perspectives. Important strategies for promoting this sort of backtracking include identifying the weaknesses of particular frames, preventing misunderstanding of them, differentiating well-supported findings from more speculative claims, and acknowledging major alternative frames.

This article has 0 Wikipedia mention.