社会与工程心理学研究室知识库

不确定性沟通(communication of uncertainty)是指与公众就带有不确定性的事件或信息进行沟通，是公共沟通中的重要研究领域。不确定性沟通为公众提供了更加丰富透明的信息，是培养信任和应对危机的重要手段，但是前人研究指出大部分沟通者认为不确定性沟通由于存在模糊的信息和掩饰的嫌疑，必然会损害民众的信任。遗憾的是，文献综述表明相关研究数量有限，且存在相互矛盾的结果，需要更多的实证证据来帮助我们更好地认识和判断不确定性沟通的效果。因此为了探究不确定信息的表达形式如何影响沟通效果，我们开展了以下研究。

研究一在多个场景下，比较了确定表达（精确数字）和不确定表达（数字区 间和文字词汇）在不确定性信息的沟通上是否存在效果差异。研究 1.1 在气候变化、经济预测的场景中开展，子研究 1.2 则在新冠疫苗的话题下开展。两项研究 的结果基本一致，即使用文字表达会显著降低受众的信任和信息接受度，而使用数字区间的表达能够得到与使用精确数字表达相同水平，甚至更高水平的民众对 信息和科学家的信任。

研究二通过探究了数字区间表达形式的各项特征对沟通效果的影响。子研究2.1比较了气候变化话题下不同均值大小对沟通效果的影响，子研究2.2比较了 流感疫苗话题下不同区间范围大小的影响，子研究2.3在改变区间大小范围后， 再次比较了流感疫苗话题下区间均值大小的影响。其结果显示：首先，均值大小对沟通效果没有影响，其次，在区间表达上，使用过小的区间会对民众的信任造 成损伤。综合研究一和研究二的结果：在表达不确定性信息时，使用范围适中的数字区间不仅能够与确定表达一样得到民众的信任和接受，还可能存在更加积极 的效应。

研究三探究了不同框架对不确定性沟通效果的影响。研究 3.1 探究了积极消极框架下的不确定性沟通，研究 3.2 探究了使用不同的不确定性来源解释框架时不确定性沟通效果的差异。结果表明，积极消极框架下不确定性信息与确定性信息的沟通效果没有显著差异，而在将不确定性出现的原因解释为方法不足时，人们比确定信息更加信任使用数字区间的信息。

研究四试图验证不确定性沟通中的“情绪-认知”双通路机制。其研究结果显示，不确定信息主要通过认知通路起作用，其会通过降低了民众的概率感知，进一步降低了信任和信息接受度，而不确定信息较少会影响到情绪的波动。此外，在控制了认知和情绪通路外，不确定性信息对信任仍有直接的积极影响，这表明不确定性沟通有提升民众信任的潜力。

综上，本研究发现使用范围适中的数字区间形式进行不确定性沟通时，能够获得与精确形式一样的信任和信息接受度，并且在特定的背景下，它能够获得比 精确形式的信息更多的民众信任，而这一过程主要通过认知通路而非情绪通路起作用。本研究拓展了公共沟通研究的范畴，关注了不确定性沟通的积极影响。在风险管理实践中，本研究的开展有助于应对不确定场景下的信息沟通，为不确定信息的沟通提供了判断和预测的有效研究证据。

Communication of uncertainty refers to engaging the public in discussions about events or information that contain elements of uncertainty, representing a significant area of research within the realm of public communication. Communication of uncertainty furnishes the public with richer and more transparent information, serving as a vital tool for fostering trust and managing crises. However, previous studies suggest that most communicators believe such communication, due to its ambiguous information and potential for obfuscation, could inevitably harm public trust. Regrettably, a review of the literature indicates a scarcity of research in this area, with existing studies showing contradictory results, underscoring the need for more empirical evidence to better understand and assess the effects of communication of uncertainty. Thus, to explore how the presentation of uncertain information affects communication outcomes, the following studies were conducted.

Study One compared the effects of certain expressions (precise numbers) and uncertain expressions (numerical ranges and verbal terms) in communicating uncertain information across multiple scenarios. Sub-study 1.1 was conducted in the context of climate change and economic forecasts, while sub-study 1.2 focused on the topic of COVID-19 vaccines. The results of both studies were largely consistent, showing that verbal expressions significantly reduced audience trust and acceptance of information, whereas numerical ranges achieved the same level, or even higher levels, of public trust in the information and scientists as did precise numbers.

Study Two examined the impact of various characteristics of numerical range expressions on communication effectiveness. Sub-study 2.1 compared the effect of different mean sizes in the context of climate change, sub-study 2.2 examined the impact of different range sizes on the topic of flu vaccines, and sub-study 2.3 re-evaluated the impact of mean sizes after changing the range sizes on the same topic. The results indicated that, firstly, the size of the mean had no effect on communication outcomes, and secondly, using too narrow ranges could damage public trust. Integrating the findings of Studies One and Two, it was determined that employing numerical ranges of moderate size in expressing uncertain information not only garnered public trust and acceptance comparable to certain expressions but could also have more positive effects.

Study Three explored the impact of different framing on the effectiveness of communication of uncertainty. Sub-study 3.1 investigated uncertain communication under positive and negative framing, while sub-study 3.2 examined the differences in uncertain communication effectiveness when different sources of uncertainty were explained through framing. The findings showed that there were no significant differences in the effectiveness of communication between uncertain and certain information under positive and negative framing. However, when the reasons for uncertainty were attributed to methodological shortcomings, people trusted numerical range information more than certain information.

Study Four aimed to verify the "emotion-cognition" dual-pathway mechanism in the communication of uncertainty. The findings demonstrated that uncertain information primarily operates through the cognitive pathway, reducing public probability perception and, consequently, trust and information acceptance, while uncertain information had less impact on emotional fluctuations. Moreover, even after controlling for cognitive and emotional pathways, uncertain information still had a direct positive impact on trust, suggesting the potential of communication of uncertainty to enhance public trust.

In summary, this research found that communicating uncertainty using numerical ranges of moderate size could achieve the same levels of trust and information acceptance as precise forms. In certain contexts, it could garner even more public trust than precise forms, primarily through the cognitive rather than the emotional pathway. This study expands the scope of public communication research, focusing on the positive effects of communication of uncertainty. In the practice of risk management, this research contributes to managing information communication in uncertain scenarios, providing valuable empirical evidence for assessing and forecasting the communication of uncertain information.