Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Apr 22;23(4):e27832.
doi: 10.2196/27832.

Communicating Scientific Uncertainty About the COVID-19 Pandemic: Online Experimental Study of an Uncertainty-Normalizing Strategy

Affiliations

Communicating Scientific Uncertainty About the COVID-19 Pandemic: Online Experimental Study of an Uncertainty-Normalizing Strategy

Paul K J Han et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Communicating scientific uncertainty about public health threats such as COVID-19 is an ethically desirable task endorsed by expert guidelines on crisis communication. However, the communication of scientific uncertainty is challenging because of its potential to promote ambiguity aversion-a well-described syndrome of negative psychological responses consisting of heightened risk perceptions, emotional distress, and decision avoidance. Communication strategies that can inform the public about scientific uncertainty while mitigating ambiguity aversion are a critical unmet need.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate whether an "uncertainty-normalizing" communication strategy-aimed at reinforcing the expected nature of scientific uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic-can reduce ambiguity aversion, and to compare its effectiveness to conventional public communication strategies aimed at promoting hope and prosocial values.

Methods: In an online factorial experiment conducted from May to June 2020, a national sample of 1497 US adults read one of five versions of an informational message describing the nature, transmission, prevention, and treatment of COVID-19; the versions varied in level of expressed scientific uncertainty and supplemental focus (ie, uncertainty-normalizing, hope-promoting, and prosocial). Participants then completed measures of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral manifestations of ambiguity aversion (ie, perceived likelihood of getting COVID-19, COVID-19 worry, and intentions for COVID-19 risk-reducing behaviors and vaccination). Analyses assessed (1) the extent to which communicating uncertainty produced ambiguity-averse psychological responses; (2) the comparative effectiveness of uncertainty-normalizing, hope-promoting, and prosocial communication strategies in reducing ambiguity-averse responses; and (3) potential moderators of the effects of alternative uncertainty communication strategies.

Results: The communication of scientific uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic increased perceived likelihood of getting COVID-19 and worry about COVID-19, consistent with ambiguity aversion. However, it did not affect intentions for risk-reducing behaviors or vaccination. The uncertainty-normalizing strategy reduced these aversive effects of communicating scientific uncertainty, resulting in levels of both perceived likelihood of getting COVID-19 and worry about COVID-19 that did not differ from the control message that did not communicate uncertainty. In contrast, the hope-promoting and prosocial strategies did not decrease ambiguity-averse responses to scientific uncertainty. Age and political affiliation, respectively, moderated the effects of uncertainty communication strategies on intentions for COVID-19 risk-reducing behaviors and worry about COVID-19.

Conclusions: Communicating scientific uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic produces ambiguity-averse cognitive and emotional, but not behavioral, responses among the general public, and an uncertainty-normalizing communication strategy reduces these responses. Normalizing uncertainty may be an effective strategy for mitigating ambiguity aversion in crisis communication efforts. More research is needed to test uncertainty-normalizing communication strategies and to elucidate the factors that moderate their effectiveness.

Keywords: COVID-19; ambiguity; communication; uncertainty; vaccination.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study design. Alternative uncertainty communication strategies and between-group comparisons. H1: Hypothesis 1; H2: Hypothesis 2.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Effects of uncertainty and uncertainty communication strategies on cognitive, emotional, and behavioral manifestations of ambiguity aversion. Asterisks indicate statistically significant pairwise differences (P<.05); error bars indicate standard error. U: uncertainty; U+HP: uncertainty + hope-promoting; U+PS: uncertainty + prosocial; U+UN: uncertainty + uncertainty-normalizing.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Moderators of the effects of uncertainty communication strategy on manifestations of ambiguity aversion: age and political affiliation. U: uncertainty; U+HP: uncertainty + hope-promoting; U+PS: uncertainty + prosocial; U+UN: uncertainty + uncertainty-normalizing.

References

    1. Freimuth VS. Order out of chaos: The self-organization of communication following the anthrax attacks. Health Commun. 2006;20(2):141–148. doi: 10.1207/s15327027hc2002_5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Liu BF, Bartz L, Duke N. Communicating crisis uncertainty: A review of the knowledge gaps. Public Relat Rev. 2016 Sep;42(3):479–487. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.03.003. - DOI
    1. Seeger MW. Best practices in crisis communication: An expert panel process. J Appl Commun Res. 2006 Aug;34(3):232–244. doi: 10.1080/00909880600769944. - DOI
    1. Berg JW. All for one and one for all: Informed consent and public health. Houst Law Rev. 2012;50(1):1–40. https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&c...
    1. Covello VT. Best practices in public health risk and crisis communication. J Health Commun. 2003;8 Suppl 1:5–8; discussion 148. doi: 10.1080/713851971. - DOI - PubMed