A systems-level approach to tackle scientific misinformation
Contrasting the spread of scientific misinformation proved to be complicated. A recently published report focussing on the American situation identified some possible paths towards solutions
A report released in 2024 by the U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, titled Understanding and Addressing Misinformation About Science, presents the findings of an extensive analysis of the spread and potential harm of scientific and health-related misinformation at both individual and community levels.
Adopting a multi-source approach, the report draws from academic research on misinformation, available social media data, data from offline information networks, and local, community-based sources. Analysing this information, a committee of experts compiled a U.S.-focused assessment of misinformation's prevalence and impact in societal contexts and provided recommendations for preventing and/or mitigating its rapid circulation.
For the purposes of this report, scientific misinformation is defined as "information that asserts or implies claims that are inconsistent with the weight of accepted scientific evidence at the time (reflecting both quality and quantity of evidence). Which claims are determined to be misinformation about science can evolve over time as new evidence accumulates and scientific knowledge regarding those claims advances."
No one is exempted
A recurring theme in the report is the concept of complexity. The modern information landscape is increasingly intricate and rapidly evolving, influenced by various economic, social, cultural, and contextual factors. These factors can contribute to making certain individuals or groups more susceptible to misinformation 'traps.' Importantly, no one is entirely immune to misinformation. Given the multiplicity of factors at play, its spread is not limited to vulnerable social groups. Still, it can also affect those who might seem well-equipped to recognise misinformation and resist it.
The report highlights that misinformation in the scientific domain is not spread solely by actors with vested interests, such as, for instance, corporations trying to lobby for their own agendas. It can also originate within research institutions – sometimes, for example, due to poorly communicated studies – and even from funders of scientific research.
Given that "science and medicine are among the most trusted institutions in today's society", it is crucial for these institutions to take an active role in countering misinformation. This includes fostering positive interactions between scientists, researchers, and science journalists and communicators, as well as providing specialised training for researchers who engage with the public. Additionally, when individual members of research institutions take on public-facing roles, they should receive targeted training to enhance their communication effectiveness and always work in tandem with science communication professionals.
Research institutions should also pay greater attention to the accuracy and clarity of the science they communicate, primarily when information spreads faster than ever – a phenomenon sometimes referred to as "infodemic." The rise of social media usage and consumption has amplified the rapid spread of misinformation, and at the same time, journalism is undergoing rapid transformations. In the U.S., many journalistic organisations face chronic underfunding, with smaller and local news outlets struggling to invest in fact-checking and specialised expertise.
To address these challenges, the committee suggests:
"In training the next generation of professional communicators in journalism, public relations, and other media and communication industries, universities and other providers of communication training programs should design learning experiences that integrate disciplinary knowledge and practices from communication research and various sciences and support the development of competencies in scientific and data literacy and reasoning."
High-quality, culturally relevant, accurately translated, and timely
Another key recommendation from the National Institutes of Science, Engineering, and Medicine is to strengthen collaboration among journalists and between journalists and various stakeholders, including local communities and media outlets. This cooperation would help "ensure that accurate, high-quality science information is disseminated to diverse publics both during emergencies as well as in preparing for emergencies.
One of the most pressing reasons for addressing misinformation is the profound impact it may have at both individual and societal levels. Misinformation can directly influence personal decision-making and, at a collective level, distort public opinion, disrupt productive debate, and erode trust in institutions vital to a healthy democracy. It can also exacerbate existing harms such as health disparities and discrimination. The report underscores that misinformation about science "has great potential to disrupt individual agency and collective decision making, to exacerbate existing harms (e.g., health disparities, discrimination), to distort public opinion in ways that limit productive debate, and to diminish trust in institutions that are important to a healthy democracy."
However, all these issues boil down to one point: combating misinformation requires sufficient financial resources to provide "high-quality, culturally relevant, accurately translated, and timely science information to the communities they serve."
Given the many layers of complexity surrounding misinformation's spread and social impact, a non-compartmentalised, systemic approach is urgently required. The report stresses that placing the burden of identifying and countering misinformation solely on individuals is ineffective and sometimes even counterproductive. Instead, addressing misinformation requires a systemic, coordinated effort. It is time for public and private funders to shift their priorities and budget to more effectively combat the spread of scientific misinformation through systems-level research and interventions in this field.
Further reading:
