PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Kerr, John R.
AU  - van der Bles, Anne Marthe
AU  - Schneider, Claudia
AU  - Dryhurst, Sarah
AU  - Chopurian, Vivien
AU  - Freeman, Alexandra L.J.
AU  - van der Linden, Sander
TI  - The effects of communicating uncertainty around statistics on public trust: an international study
AID  - 10.1101/2021.09.27.21264202
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.09.27.21264202
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/29/2021.09.27.21264202.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/29/2021.09.27.21264202.full
AB  - A growing body of research indicates that transparent communication of statistical uncertainty around facts and figures does not undermine credibility. However, the extent to which these findings apply in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic—rife with uncertainties—is unclear. In a large international survey experiment, (Study 1; N = 10,519) we report that communicating uncertainty around COVID-19 statistics in the form of a numeric range (vs. no uncertainty) may lead to slightly lower trust in the number presented but has no impact on trust in the source of the information. We also report the minimal impact of numeric uncertainty on trust is consistent across estimates of current or future COVID-19 statistics (Study 2) and figures relating to environmental or economic research, rather than the pandemic (Study 3). Conversely, we find imprecise statements about the mere existence of uncertainty without quantification can undermine both trust in the numbers and their source – though effects vary across countries and contexts. Communicators can be transparent about statistical uncertainty without concerns about undermining perceptions of their trustworthiness, but ideally should aim to use numerical ranges rather than verbal statements.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis project was funded by the Nuffield Foundation, but the views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily the Foundation. Visit www.nuffieldfoundation.org. Additional funding was provided by the Winton Centre for Risk & Evidence Communication which is supported by a donation from the David & Claudia Harding Foundation.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics CommitteeAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData and R analysis scripts are available on the Open Science Foundation website. https://osf.io/y982k/?view_only=07f2c4fd8000488f90f564f5a209bb9c