Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26880833›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2016

Communicating about ocean health: theoretical and practical considerations.

Jonathon P Schuldt, Katherine A McComas, Sahara E Byrne

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Marine disease impacts, diagnosis, forecasting, management and policy.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jonathon P SchuldtDepartment of Communication, Cornell University, Mann Library Building, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA jps56@cornell.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0885-0160
Katherine A McComasDepartment of Communication, Cornell University, Mann Library Building, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
Sahara E ByrneDepartment of Communication, Cornell University, Mann Library Building, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As anthropogenic stressors threaten the health of marine ecosystems, there is a need to better understand how the public processes and responds to information about ocean health. Recent studies of public perceptions about ocean issues report high concern but limited knowledge, prompting calls for information campaigns to mobilize public support for ocean restoration policy. Drawing on the literature from communication, psychology and related social science disciplines, we consider a set of social-cognitive challenges that researchers and advocates are likely to encounter when communicating with the public about ocean health and emerging marine diseases--namely, the psychological distance at which ocean issues are construed, the unfamiliarity of aquatic systems to many members of the public and the potential for marine health issues to be interpreted through politicized schemas that encourage motivated reasoning over the dispassionate consideration of scientific evidence. We offer theory-based strategies to help public outreach efforts address these challenges and present data from a recent experiment exploring the role of message framing (emphasizing the public health or environmental consequences of marine disease) in shaping public support for environmental policy.

Indexed as

EcosystemEnvironmental PollutionOceans and SeasAnimalsAwarenessConservation of Natural ResourcesHumansPoliticsenvironmental communicationframing effectsocean healthpoliticizationpsychological distancepublic opinion

Identifiers

PMID26880833
PMCPMC4760144

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.