Solve scientific misinformation not by repeating facts, but by building dialogue and community

Misinformation on scientific topics, including falsehoods such as vaccines that can lead to autism and climate change is a completely natural phenomenon that scientists have been discussing more and more. Widespread misinformation can lead to confusion about public health and environmental issues and can hinder those who are committed to solving social problems.

As an environmental social scientist who studies how science has an impact on society, I seek effective ways to resolve misinformation.

There are many ways to work to some extent: for example, scientific topics based on quality research to offset false information, statements convey what most experts agree with and discover their fallacies in false information by preparing to Before, they were “inoculated” and then “inoculated” people. They touched it first.

But one of the most important ways to offset misinformation is facts, and more about how these facts move across social networks and communities. In other words, this is not enough to make science correct – any meaningful influence must be accepted in people's social circles.

Can facts change your mind?

Most people tend to assume that their knowledge and ideas are based on rational, objective analysis of information. Sometimes that's it – if it snows outside, people won't stick to the weather and warmth, no matter they may like it.

Similarly, if a person encounters some novel facts in the news, such as discovering a new type of plant in Amazon, they may absorb this information and about a day.

But when it comes to ideas that challenge one’s former worldview or social identity, rationality and the ability to embrace new information disappear. Such information can be like a personal attack, causing the body to release cortisol, a stress-related hormone. Therefore, certain facts may feel threatening or offensive.

What’s going on in the brain is what’s going on in people’s community. Humans are social animals, and they turn to other people they trust to help them understand what they know. People will accept normal or acceptable issues in a social environment, so they are also more likely to adopt such beliefs if their social groups have special beliefs.

A person’s cultural and political identity often determines how they interpret the same information, even with the same evidence, can lead to disagreement.

These cultural identities explain why, for example, studies have found that behaviors of scientific attitudes, such as vaccine hesitation and climate denialism, tend to gather in social and geographical pockets. In these pockets, people with similar beliefs about social networks reinforce people’s suspicion. In this case, providing more evidence on a subject would not help and might even lead to digging deeper to deny the evidence.

So what if the facts don't necessarily change their minds?

Utilize community networks

Recent research has provided solutions for scientists and institutions looking to correct misinformation: not to fight the social nature of human beings, but to work with it.

When people see trustworthy people in social networks, holding certain beliefs, this belief becomes more credible and easier to adopt. Using these community connections can make new ideas attractive.

A good example of using social networks to fight misinformation is how India eradicates polio. In 2009, India was the world's polio center with half of the world's cases. These cases are mainly concentrated in the vaccine-resident areas of the country. But by 2011, just two years later, India had only one case, and the country officially celebrated polio in 2014.

How did India go from half of the world's cases to less than two years?

Public health agencies require volunteers in the anti-vaccine community to listen to the campaign and become ambassadors for vaccines. Volunteers are trained in interpersonal skills and are responsible for spending time with their parents. They build trust and rapport through regular visits.

Since volunteers are known within the community, they are able to make progress without health workers in urban areas. When they build a rapport, indecisive parents share their concerns, which often go beyond polio, including other health issues.

Over time, more and more parents decide to vaccinate their children until there is a turning point and vaccination becomes social norm. Perhaps most notably, the sport has resulted in a complete routine immunity rate in some of the country's high-risk areas.

India’s incredible success emphasizes the importance of personal interactions to change minds, meaning more than simply presenting facts. Building trust, listening to concerns and interacting with the community in meaningful ways is an integral part of polio eradication in India.

The power of dialogue

Another example of using the power of social networks to talk about controversial scientific topics comes from an approach called “deep reference.” In-depth reference is a unique method of communication involving conversations with the public at the door.

But unlike traditional canvassing that usually focuses on gathering existing supporters, deep canvassing intentionally seeks to interact with those who hold different perspectives, focusing their energy on the controversial community of the topic.

Canvas people are trained to ask questions to better understand the other person’s experiences and opinions on the issue, and then they share their personal stories. This helps build relationships that both parties feel heard and respected. This connection can help reduce the negative emotions that may arise when someone is challenged to rethink their beliefs.

A notable example of the deep canvassing action is the work of Neighbors United, an environmental nonprofit in Canada. They use a profound approach to engage people in conversations about climate change.

They piloted the method in a rural, conservative community called Trail, home to one of the largest zinc and lead smelters in the world. Previous efforts to hire community members have not had much impact, as action on climate change is largely seen as conflicting with how many people make a living.

However, the deep approach worked. Upon the door, the Canvas people listened to residents’ concerns, shared their stories about the impacts of climate change, and emphasized the local environmental success.

As a result, one-third of residents shifted their perceptions about the importance of taking action to address climate change. This extensive community support led to a city council vote to transition to 100% renewable energy by 2050.

Sociologist Anthony Giddens describes the interpersonal interactions between experts, such as doctors or scientists and the public. He believes that these views are crucial to maintaining trust in government and scientific institutions, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the Environmental Protection Agency.

These face-to-face interactions with experts can help people see them as kind, warm and professional, which can lead to trust.

These examples show that support for scientific attitudes and behaviors requires not only the facts. It requires a meaningful dialogue between the skeptic group and the science messenger. It is also a reminder that while social networks may help spread misinformation, they can also be important tools to address that information.