Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Cartoonist John Cook has attempted to employ his personal expertise on strange aberrations to help our old friend Stephan Lewandowsky create a psychological “vaccine”, to reduce the influence of climate skeptics.
Scientists are testing a “vaccine” against climate change denial
“Inoculating” people against misinformation may give scientific facts a shot at survival.
Updated by Michelle Nijhuis May 31, 2017, 8:30am EDT
In the battle between facts and fake news, facts are at a disadvantage. Researchers have found that facts alone rarely dislodge misperceptions, and in some cases even strengthen mistaken beliefs.
…
But two recent, preliminary studies suggest there’s hope for the facts about climate change. Borrowing from the medical lexicon, these studies show that it may be possible to metaphorically “inoculate” people against misinformation about climate change, and by doing so give the facts a boost. What’s more, these researchers suggest, strategic inoculation could create a level of “herd immunity” and undercut the overall effects of fake news.
…
John Cook, a cognitive scientist at the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University in Virginia, recently tested the strength of inoculation messages against the notorious Oregon Petition, which uses fake experts to cast doubt on the scientific consensus on climate change.
In the journal PLOS One, Cook and his colleagues reported that when about 100 study participants were presented with the misinformation alone, their views did further polarize along political lines. But when another group of participants were first warned about a general strategy used in misinformation campaigns — in this case, they were told that fake experts had often been used by the tobacco industry to question the scientific consensus about the effects of tobacco on health, and were shown an ad with the text “20,679 physicians say ‘Luckies are less irritating’” — the polarizing effect of the misinformation was completely neutralized.
“Nobody likes to be misled, no matter their politics,” says Cook. He suggests that inoculation messages may serve to put listeners on alert for trickery, making them more likely to scrutinize the information they receive.
…
Read more: https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/5/31/15713838/inoculation-climate-change-denial
The abstract of John Cook and Stephan Lewandowsky’s study;
Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence
John Cook , Stephan Lewandowsky, Ullrich K. H. Ecker
Published: May 5, 2017
Misinformation can undermine a well-functioning democracy. For example, public misconceptions about climate change can lead to lowered acceptance of the reality of climate change and lowered support for mitigation policies. This study experimentally explored the impact of misinformation about climate change and tested several pre-emptive interventions designed to reduce the influence of misinformation. We found that false-balance media coverage (giving contrarian views equal voice with climate scientists) lowered perceived consensus overall, although the effect was greater among free-market supporters. Likewise, misinformation that confuses people about the level of scientific agreement regarding anthropogenic global warming (AGW) had a polarizing effect, with free-market supporters reducing their acceptance of AGW and those with low free-market support increasing their acceptance of AGW. However, we found that inoculating messages that (1) explain the flawed argumentation technique used in the misinformation or that (2) highlight the scientific consensus on climate change were effective in neutralizing those adverse effects of misinformation. We recommend that climate communication messages should take into account ways in which scientific content can be distorted, and include pre-emptive inoculation messages.
Read more: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175799
The climate wrongthink psychological vaccine idea has been kicking around for a while.
John Cook’s attack on the Oregon Petition is amusing. Back in 2012, PBS News embarrassed themselves trying to attack the reputation of the signatories to the Oregon Petition, when they pulled out a signature at random and displayed it on air. At the last moment someone in post-production realised the signature was that of Edward Teller, one of the giants of 20th Century Physics. PBS then compounded their embarrassment by allegedly trying to conceal their mistake – somehow the image of Edward Teller’s signature was blurred.
I’m sure some fakes have slipped through the process of vetting 30,000+ signatures, but there is no doubt many of the signatories to the Oregon Petition have serious scientific reputations.
There are at least two fundamental problems with their ideas. The first assumes that people are dubious because of what sceptics have told them. In reality, by the time people listen to us, they’re already sceptics through their own observations. People compare what warmists come out with, against their own lifetime of knowledge and experience. Climate science is flawed and it doesn’t take a scientist to see it.
The second issue involves cost. Given how inconvenient, expensive and broadly useless renewables are, the level of persuasion people need to support CO2 reduction is very high. The subtle, ephemeral effect of ‘inoculation’ can’t stand up to the harsh realities of the utilities bills or your views ruined by wind farms. It’s like trying to fight someone who wields a club, with a feather. While in the lab, people react to the feather, when faced with the club, the influence of the feather is non existent. The only thing that will sway the public is better science.
Those two concepts are not complicated and anyone working on the issue of AGW should recognise them. Which begs the question, why is anyone publishing and paying these two clowns?
This sounds just like the cook-lewser gobbledygook they were peddling last year.
If, I read that correct; the infamous Cook is now in Virginia at that haven of RICO hawking activists practicing RICO illegalities?
Just in case, I find myself in the company of infamy.
I should prepare my water pistols and make sure they’re filled with sucrose solutions and some drops of Phenolphthalein. Perhaps a few drops of honey for fragrance…
FYA
Virginia summers are filled with friendly stinging insects that just love sugary fluids; wasps, hornets, bees, ants. We even have flightless wasps that look remarkably like brilliantly colored large hyperactive ants.
A few squirts of sucrose laden water on a person’s back, hat, hair, shoes, socks, briefcase, whatever goes a long way to developing budding insect friendships and perhaps a few rivalries. Few things are as attention getting as European Wasps facing off against bald faced hornets over a sweet smelling trifle. Throw in a fearless determined humming bird or two, voila!
Phenolphthalein well, beside being a useful acid/base test liquid; a few drops ingested, makes commercial laxatives seem like paltry performers.
Maybe, I should mention that black bears found not far from George Mason are very fond of honey and sugar odors; wasp and hornet snacks are bonuses!
Cognitive scientist?? Whaaaat???
Cognitwitive, perhaps, but….whaazaat?
I was wondering about that “cognitive” myself
How *do* these 2 get away with saying the stuff they do?
This kind of hubristic superiority, repeatedly directed against *any* other section of a population (or even an entire population) would see them severely censored, sacked if not jailed.
Maybe Political Correctness gone wild? Has *nobody* the where-with-all, the guts, clear head and self confidence to actually tell these 2 ‘people’ just how appalling their behaviour is?
But we know, anyone who does challenge them will get mired in the same PC swamp, while swarms of parasitic lawyers bleed them dry. (Stein vs Mann?)
The Erosion/Corrosion of Civilisation continues – and you don’t get much more corrosive than these 2.
I was going to leave an intelligent and informative comment, but noticed so many stupid ones here I decided not to waste my time on stupid.
Could’ve just admitted you couldn’t think of anything.
I said not to “waste my time on stupid”, stupid. Thanks for proving my point – LMAO!
Oooh go on. Brighten our day. Not that I can imagine what intelligent and informative comment you could make about this comedy paper of Dr Lews.
Of course you can’t imagine anything “intelligent” or “informative.” You just took my bait like a brainless fish my comment just reeled in. LOL – oh, this is so-o-o sweet!
🙂
Unlike the massive use of fraud, planned deception, data tampering, lying about the relationship to tobacco, and hatred of democracy demonstrated by Cook and Lewandowsky.
It’s not “inoculation” they’re talking about. It’s “indoctrination”.
I dunno, inoculation involves a prick and a pain. I can think how that might apply to Cook, Dr Lew and their work.
[blockquote]I was going to leave an intelligent and informative comment,[/blockquote]
A 97% “intelligent and informative” or an original and in the minority one that make the science go on?
Fish number 3! Keep ’em coming…
Oh, oh, oh. Very funny. I like it.
Now that you said something “intelligent and informative” can you say something new?
I love laugh.
Once again we get medical terminology for a social group. Where have i seen that before?
So you decide you know what is right, decide that makes you an expert and then deduce that must mean those who disagree with you are fake experts.
And you are so dumb/arrogant/unthinking that you can’t see the fundamental flaw in your reasoning.
I despair.
“I despair”
Progressives’ mission accomplished!
I am going to be honest – I don’t know if this article is serious or satire. John Cook is trying to figure out how to inoculate people against scientific misinformation? Seriously? Wouldn’t that be like shooting yourself in the foot?
For John, yes, exactly.
“Innoculating messages”. Translation: lies.
How original. Why haven’t they thought of this before? Oh wait.
A summary: Over many years politicians and manufacturers of washing detergents have spent squillions of dollars trying to find ways to make the public believe one person’s “truth” over and above another person’s “truth”. Cook and Lewandowsky would have their sponsors believe they have found a simple short cut. Riiiiight.
Quite apart from their own inability to separate truth from fiction, the arrogance of these people is breathtaking.
People need to be inoculated against the 97%of scientists lie again.
Are we sure this paper isn’t Alan Sokal’s rewrite of his original hoax article, “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity” ?
Excerpted from above published commentary:
Now don’t you all be forgetting the literal fact that the above is a, per se, “double edged sword” that “cuts” in both directions ……. and thus achieves the same or similar but opposite results, to wit:
“In the battle between fake news and facts, fake news is at a disadvantage. Simple acts of research will prove that fake news alone rarely ever dislodges perceptions of truths and facts, and in most cases will even strengthen one’s personal beliefs in/of said truths and facts.”
Continuing of the above “much ado about nothing” psychological claims:
Phooey, inoculations are only effective if the subject (person) is “inoculated” prior to being subjected to any of the “misinformation about climate change”, ……. which is damn near impossible in today’s society because 80% to 95% of all young children and students are being inoculated with the “misinformation about climate change” which they truly believe to be “true and factual”.
As long as the Public Schools are permitted to continue their “inoculations” of the young children, adolescents and/or teenagers with the “junk-science misinformation of/on climate change”, ….. then your re-inoculation efforts are little more than “an act of futility”.
To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy. Bertrand Russell
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/b/bertrand_russell.html
A Stefan Lewandowski production
A John Cook Film
Der Klimat Schutzstaffel
Voted comedy of the year
I will never believe people who make-up and adjust their “evidence”.
True. It is very hard to determine when liars are telling the truth.
Get that guy on NPR, CNN, NBC, and CBS. He’s a perfect front man for getting the word out that there really is something wrong in La La land. Also make him the face of George Mason University for parents and prospective students to see front and center.
Well actually, it worked on Griff. It’s too bad that it has the side effect of turning off the critical thinking part of the brain though.
And what will Kookansowsky they call this ‘vaccine’? Kook Ade?
““Inoculating” people against misinformation may give scientific facts a shot at survival.”
However, in their attempt to do this, they will continue to distort scientific facts with misinformation and deceptions making it impossible for science to survive.
,
If John Cook’s dressing up as a Nazi was a “joke” then this Russian expression about jokes is certainly correct:
“In every joke, only a little bit is joke and the rest is true”.
It’s the perfect potion for realizing down is up and cold is warm comrade. Now gulp it down like a good ideologue soldier.