Backtracking and the ethics of framing: Lessons from voles and vasopressin

26Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

When communicating scientific information, experts often face difficult choices about how to promote public understanding while also maintaining an appropriate level of objectivity. We argue that one way for scientists and others involved in communicating scientific information to alleviate these tensions is to pay closer attention to the major frames employed in the contexts in which they work. By doing so, they can ideally employ useful frames while also enabling the recipients of information to "backtrack" to relatively uncontroversial facts and recognize how these frames relate to their own values and perspectives. Important strategies for promoting this sort of backtracking include identifying the weaknesses of particular frames, preventing misunderstanding of them, differentiating well-supported findings from more speculative claims, and acknowledging major alternative frames. © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McKaughan, D. J., & Elliott, K. C. (2013). Backtracking and the ethics of framing: Lessons from voles and vasopressin. Accountability in Research, 20(3), 206–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.788384

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free