Stigma in science: the case of earthquake prediction.

This paper explores how earthquake scientists conceptualise earthquake prediction, particularly given the conviction of six earthquake scientists for manslaughter (subsequently overturned) on 22 October 2012 for having given inappropriate advice to the public prior to the L'Aquila earthquake of 6 April 2009. In the first study of its kind, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 earthquake scientists and the transcribed interviews were analysed thematically. The scientists primarily denigrated earthquake prediction, showing strong emotive responses and distancing themselves from earthquake 'prediction' in favour of 'forecasting'. Earthquake prediction was regarded as impossible and harmful. The stigmatisation of the subject is discussed in the light of research on boundary work and stigma in science. The evaluation reveals how mitigation becomes the more favoured endeavour, creating a normative environment that disadvantages those who continue to pursue earthquake prediction research. Recommendations are made for communication with the public on earthquake risk, with a focus on how scientists portray uncertainty.

[1]  J. Milne.  The Observatory at Messina , 1911, Nature.

[2]  Alfred Wegener,et al.  The Origin of Continents and Oceans , 1925 .

[3]  J. W. Gregory,et al.  The Origin of Continents and Oceans , 1925, Nature.

[4]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[5]  E. Goffman.  Stigma; Notes On The Management Of Spoiled Identity , 1964 .

[6]  K. Popper,et al.  Conjectures and Refutations , 1963 .

[7]  J Oliver,et al.  Earthquake Prediction , 1987, Journal of the World Association for Emergency and Disaster Medicine.

[8]  B. Barnes,et al.  Scientific Knowledge: A Sociological Analysis , 1974 .

[9]  P. Feyerabend.  Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge , 1976 .

[10]  R. Merton,et al.  Thematic Analysis in Science: Notes on Holton's Concept. , 1975, Science.

[11]  S. Mick.  The foreign medical graduate. , 1975, Scientific American.

[12]  C. Richter,et al.  Second Award of the Medal of the Seismological Society of America , 1977, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[13]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[14]  D. W. Hands,et al.  Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge , 1977 .

[15]  B. Latour,et al.  Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts , 1979 .

[16]  C. R. Allen,et al.  Earthquake prediction—1982 overview , 1982 .

[17]  J. Nigg.  Communication Under Conditions of Uncertainty: Understanding Earthquake Forecasting , 1982 .

[18]  T. Gieryn.  Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional , 1983 .

[19]  Joanne M. Nigg,et al.  Waiting for Disaster: Earthquake Watch in California , 1986 .

[20]  M Shipman,et al.  Whose Fault Was It?: An Analysis of Newspaper Coverage of Iben Browning's New Madrid Fault Earthquake Prediction , 1993 .

[21]  P. S. Showalter.  Prognostication of Doom: An Earthquake Prediction's Effect on Four Small Communities , 1993 .

[22]  John E. Farley.  Public, Media, and Institutional Responses to the Iben Browning Earthquake Prediction , 1993 .

[23]  J Kazmierczak,et al.  Making Iconoclasts Credible: The Iben Browning Earthquake Prediction , 1993 .

[24]  S. Epstein.  Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. , 1994, The American psychologist.

[25]  J. Dearing.  Newspaper coverage of maverick science: creating controversy through balancing , 1995 .

[26]  Conrad Smith.  Reporters, news sources, and scientific intervention: the New Madrid earthquake prediction , 1996 .

[27]  G. Holton.  The role of themata in science , 1996 .

[28]  Y. Kagan,et al.  Earthquakes Cannot Be Predicted , 1997, Science.

[29]  Robert J. Geller,et al.  Earthquake prediction: a critical review , 1997 .

[30]  V. Penchaszadeh.  In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity , 1997 .

[31]  Richard E. Boyatzis,et al.  Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development , 1998 .

[32]  A. Major.  The utility of situational theory of publics for assessing public response to a disaster prediction , 1998 .

[33]  Lucy Yardley,et al.  Qualitative data collection: interviews and focus groups , 2003 .

[34]  Melissa L. Finucane,et al.  Psychosocial and cultural factors affecting the perceived risk of genetically modified food: an overview of the literature. , 2005, Social science & medicine.

[35]  M. Fiege.  The Atomic Scientists, the Sense of Wonder and the Bomb , 2007, Environmental History.

[36]  Joanna Kempner.  The Chilling Effect: How Do Researchers React to Controversy? , 2008, PLoS medicine.

[37]  E. Ramsden.  Confronting the Stigma of Eugenics , 2009, Social studies of science.

[38]  Daniel Sarewitz.  World view: Tomorrow never knows , 2010, Nature.

[39]  Marcus Y. Woo,et al.  Predicting the Unpredictable: The Tumultuous Science of Earthquake Prediction , 2010 .

[40]  Nicola Nosengo.  Italy puts seismology in the dock , 2010, Nature.

[41]  Helene Joffe,et al.  15. Thematic Analysis , 2011 .

[42]  Stephen S. Hall,et al.  Scientists on trial: At fault? , 2011, Nature.

[43]  Susanne Friese,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis with ATLAS.ti , 2012 .

[44]  Katsuya Yamori.  A Historical Overview of Social Representation of Earthquake Risk in Japan: Fatalism, Social Reform, Scientific Control and Collaborative Risk Management , 2013 .

[45]  David Alexander,et al.  Communicating earthquake risk to the public: the trial of the “L’Aquila Seven” , 2014, Natural Hazards.

[46]  Helene Joffe,et al.  Free Association in Psychology and the Grid Elaboration Method , 2014 .

[47]  E. Cartlidge.  Why Italian earthquake scientists were exonerated , 2015 .

[48]  Earthquake Fears Predictions And Preparations In Mid America , 2016 .