Abstract
ABSTRACT Communication technologies have expanded the range of actors who participate in public debates about science. When experts communicate with the public, scientifically-derived statistical evidence competes with the testimony of non-experts. This study investigates how competing statistical and testimonial evidence affect attitudes toward an issue and the debating speakers. Our findings suggest an advantage to asserting statistical evidence in competitive debates about science; a dissenting lay person is considered more credible when asserting statistical evidence in response to an expert’s testimony than when they assert testimonial evidence. Additionally, prior support for the issue affects evaluations of speakers and issue attitudes.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
