A little bit of activism increases trust in climate scientists

Some climate scientists refrain from advocacy and activism in their science communication because they fear it decreases their credibility. But whether there is indeed a relation between activism and credibility can be tested.

Here, we discuss the results of an experiment where 1,000 Dutch respondents first read a text on the impacts of the greening of gardens. Respondents are randomly assigned to either a version written in neutral tone, or a version written in an advocating tone. We then compare how the respondents perceive the credibility of the authoring scientist in these texts.

Our analyses show that the perceived credibility of the scientist who authored the text increases by advocacy overall, and that the advocating scientist is considered more credible than the neutral scientist specifically in their perceived sensitivity and care for society.

Based on these results, we conclude that advocacy can increase the climate scientist's average perceived credibility. This study may thus serve as endorsement for the many climate scientists who are willing to take a more advocacy-driven approach in their communications but are unsure of the consequences.