Public Understanding of Science Blog

 By Elisa Lello and Niccolò Bertuzzi. Scientific knowledge and traditional epistemic authorities are the object of growing skepticism in Western societies. Scholars contextualized such a phenomenon into a wider coming to light of an anti-science or post-truth era, in a debate centred on the concepts of epistemic populism and, in particular, 'science-related populism '. Our study focused on popular dissent toward compulsory vaccination and pandemic management policies during the Covid-19 pandemic, a topic which is generally identified, and also by Mede and Schäfer’s work , as a crucial example of science-related populism. We focus on Italy, the first Western country to be hit by the Covid-19 pandemic and one that, according to the Oxford University Stringency Index, has taken particularly stringent measures to tackle the health crisis. Our work We started from a paradox that has been little studied. While the association of these protests with the right, even the extreme righ...

 By Yuqi Zhu and Jianxun Chu. Image generated by DALL·E and author Have you ever found yourself saying (or at least trying to say) “thank you” to AI assistants, like ChatGPT? If so, have you ever been shocked and wondered why you feel the urge to do so for something that, technically speaking, is lifeless ? After all, there’s no essential difference between AI and other tools in life, like a car, a laptop, or a vacuum cleaner. Yet, that urge just came out of nowhere after receiving a genius answer from AI that fixed the bugs bothering you, or after hearing genuine words from AI when you needed someone to talk to. Is it a common thing, or just a weird act, and does it reflect something deeper? Based on our study recently published on Public Understanding of Science , you’re definitely not alone. Screenshot from Her (2013): a conversation between Theodore (protagonist) and Samantha (AI assistant) A public debate on gratitude toward AI Early in the rise of generative AI, ...

 By Justin C. Cheung and Shirley S. Ho. Image source: ChatGPT Artificial intelligence (AI) is very popular nowadays, from ChatGPT, Apple Intelligence, to digital twin systems, and even autonomous drones. In academia, another term is gaining considerable traction: Explainable AI (XAI) .  XAI is a concept that refers to how well the algorithmic decisions (or behaviors), and the underlying algorithmic model can be understood by lay end-users. It helps people comprehend how AI behaves, which as research has shown, can greatly improve trust and thereby behavioral acceptance. In risk-laden AI applications such as autonomous passenger drones, XAI is all the more important because it has great potential to mitigate unwarranted concerns. At the core of our study , we examined the effects of perceived explainability in autonomous drone algorithms on trust factors. We delineated trust in three dimensions, namely performance (how well the AI operates), purpose (how well the AI’s obj...

 By Rod Abhari and Emőke-Ágnes Horvát.  Whether science is seen as “self-correcting” or “broken” depends in part on how the public understands retractions. Scientific retractions are increasingly used to correct the scientific record. Last year, over 10,000 academic articles were retracted, marking an all-time high. But while scientists may see retractions as an assurance of scientific integrity when a scientific topic has been the subject of political controversy, the public may see them as evidence of incompetence or even corruption.  Our recent article , available online in Public Understanding of Science, examined social media posts of the most discussed retracted COVID-19 articles in order to better understand the relationship between scientific retractions and the politicization of science.  When Retractions Failed In May 2020, The Lancet published a study concluding that hydroxychloroquine—a drug promoted by then-President Donald Trump—was ineffective a...