Discrepancy in scientific authority and media visibility of climate change scientists and contrarians
暂无分享,去创建一个
Emmanuel M. Vincent | A. Petersen | A. Westerling | E. Vincent | Alexander Michael Petersen | Anthony LeRoy Westerling
[1] J. Cook,et al. Reply to Comment on ‘Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature’ , 2013 .
[2] Heinrich D. Holland,et al. Living dangerously : the earth, its resources, and the environment , 1995 .
[3] Derek J. Koehler,et al. Can journalistic "false balance" distort public perception of consensus in expert opinion? , 2016, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.
[4] Harry Eugene Stanley,et al. Reputation and impact in academic careers , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[5] Gregory N. Mandel,et al. The Polarizing Impact of Science Literacy and Numeracy on Perceived Climate Change Risks , 2012 .
[6] G. King,et al. How the news media activate public expression and influence national agendas , 2017, Science.
[7] Stasa Milojevic,et al. Accuracy of simple, initials-based methods for author name disambiguation , 2013, J. Informetrics.
[8] B. Head,et al. Climate Change Scepticism: Reconsidering How to Respond to Core Criticisms of Climate Science and Policy , 2017 .
[9] Caitlin Drummond,et al. Individuals with greater science literacy and education have more polarized beliefs on controversial science topics , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[10] Miriam J. Metzger,et al. The science of fake news , 2018, Science.
[11] James Painter. Journalistic Depictions of Uncertainty about Climate Change , 2016 .
[12] Dietram A. Scheufele,et al. Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[13] Anthony Leiserowitz,et al. Climate on Cable , 2012 .
[14] D. Kahan. Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem , 2015 .
[15] A. Leiserowitz,et al. Inoculating the Public against Misinformation about Climate Change , 2017, Global challenges.
[16] A. Pentland,et al. Computational Social Science , 2009, Science.
[17] Sander van der Linden,et al. Special issue article On the relationship between personal experience, affect and risk perception: The case of climate change , 2014 .
[18] Robert J. Brulle. Networks of Opposition: A Structural Analysis of U.S. Climate Change Countermovement Coalitions 1989–2015 , 2019, Sociological Inquiry.
[19] M. Boykoff. Public Enemy No. 1? , 2013 .
[20] N. Oreskes. The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change , 2004, Science.
[21] I. Pavlidis,et al. Cross-disciplinary evolution of the genomics revolution , 2018, Science Advances.
[22] James Painter,et al. Climate Skepticism in British Newspapers, 2007–2011 , 2016 .
[23] Hilla Peretz,et al. Ju n 20 03 Schrödinger ’ s Cat : The rules of engagement , 2003 .
[24] Ullrich K. H. Ecker,et al. Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence , 2017, PloS one.
[25] P. Egan,et al. Turning Personal Experience into Political Attitudes: The Effect of Local Weather on Americans’ Perceptions about Global Warming , 2012 .
[26] Constantine Boussalis,et al. Text-mining the signals of climate change doubt , 2016 .
[27] S. Iyengar,et al. Scientific communication in a post-truth society , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[28] Sinan Aral,et al. The spread of true and false news online , 2018, Science.
[29] Carl T. Bergstrom,et al. The Science of Science , 2018, Science.
[30] A. Pentland,et al. Life in the network: The coming age of computational social science: Science , 2009 .
[31] L. Antilla. Climate of scepticism: US newspaper coverage of the science of climate change , 2005 .
[32] Matthew C. Nisbet,et al. Climate change, cultural cognition, and media effects: Worldviews drive news selectivity, biased processing, and polarized attitudes , 2018, Public understanding of science.
[33] B. Morton. Fake news. , 2018, Marine pollution bulletin.
[34] Hao Tam Ho,et al. Source data files , 2019 .
[35] Fake news threatens a climate literate world , 2017, Nature communications.
[36] Christian Catalini,et al. The incidence and role of negative citations in science , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[37] A. Bostrom,et al. Assessing what to address in science communication , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[38] S. Adam,et al. A changing climate of skepticism: The factors shaping climate change coverage in the US press , 2017, Public understanding of science.
[39] Justin Farrell,et al. Evidence-based strategies to combat scientific misinformation , 2019, Nature Climate Change.
[40] S. Schneider,et al. Expert credibility in climate change , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[41] M. Boykoff. The real swindle , 2008 .
[42] Robert J. Brulle. Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations , 2014, Climatic Change.
[43] N. Oreskes,et al. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming , 2010 .
[44] P. Doran,et al. Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change , 2009 .
[45] Robert J. Brulle,et al. Shifting public opinion on climate change: an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002–2010 , 2012, Climatic Change.
[46] N. Oreskes,et al. Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming , 2016 .
[47] Ethan Zuckerman,et al. Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election , 2017 .
[48] Feng Shi,et al. Millions of online book co-purchases reveal partisan differences in the consumption of science , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.
[49] Thomas M. Nichols,et al. The Death of Expertise: The Campaign against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters , 2017 .
[50] M. Boykoff,et al. Balance as bias: global warming and the US prestige press☆ , 2004 .
[51] Sven Engesser,et al. Beyond false balance: How interpretive journalism shapes media coverage of climate change , 2017 .
[52] Douglas Guilbeault,et al. Social learning and partisan bias in the interpretation of climate trends , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[53] A. McCright,et al. The Politicization of Climate Change and Polarization in the American Public's Views of Global Warming, 2001–2010 , 2011 .
[54] J. Moody,et al. Disparate foundations of scientists’ policy positions on contentious biomedical research , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[55] Alessandro Vespignani. Modelling dynamical processes in complex socio-technical systems , 2011, Nature Physics.
[56] Alexander M. Petersen,et al. Inequality and cumulative advantage in science careers: a case study of high-impact journals , 2014, EPJ Data Science.
[57] Jean-Loup Guillaume,et al. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks , 2008, 0803.0476.
[58] James Painter,et al. Cross-national comparison of the presence of climate scepticism in the print media in six countries, 2007–10 , 2012 .
[59] J. Farrell. Network structure and influence of the climate change counter-movement , 2016 .
[60] D. Barclay. Fake News, Propaganda, and Plain Old Lies: How to Find Trustworthy Information in the Digital Age , 2018 .
[61] Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia,et al. The spread of low-credibility content by social bots , 2017, Nature Communications.
[62] M. G. Morgan,et al. Reflections on an interdisciplinary collaboration to inform public understanding of climate change, mitigation, and impacts , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[63] M. Boykoff. Who Speaks for the Climate?: Making Sense of Media Reporting on Climate Change , 2011 .
[64] Ferenc Jankó,et al. Is climate change controversy good for science? IPCC and contrarian reports in the light of bibliometrics , 2017, Scientometrics.
[65] Emilio Ferrara,et al. Bots increase exposure to negative and inflammatory content in online social systems , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.