ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
The importance of scientists' intellectual humility for communicating effectively across ideological and identity-based divides.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Representation in science and trust in scientists in the USA.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
- An agenda for science communication research and practice.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Growing identity-based and partisan gaps in confidence in scientists and scientific institutions call for novel approaches to science communication. In this perspectives piece, we focus on the need for greater intellectual humility (i.e., willingness to revise one's views and admit that one might be wrong) among social scientists, who are met with particularly high levels of skepticism from the public. We begin with an overview of research demonstrating that when scientists' identities or ideologies align (or are perceived to align) with those of the public, trust in science increases. We then highlight intellectual humility as a potential tool for cultivating trust in the social sciences even when social scientists' and the public's identities or ideologies do not match. Specifically, intellectual humility among social scientists predicts less bias toward one another's research and hence may increase the diversity of perspectives to which the public is exposed and shift public perceptions of social scientists. We conclude with a discussion of how to foster intellectual humility in science communication, broadly defined.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.