Scientists Must Advocate for Science - Topic Citations

Topic ID: 101

Every citation has two independent 0-100 scores. The source Reliability score rates the general reliability of the outlet itself, regardless of the specific claim, based on an eight-tier scale running from primary government and international scientific bodies (CDC, WHO, NASA, IPCC) at the top, through peer-reviewed journals, wire services, mainstream science journalism, and advocacy organizations, down to tertiary references like Wikipedia and unverifiable or absent sources at the bottom.

The Accuracy score, by contrast, rates how well a specific citation supports topic statements — a citation from an excellent source can score low if misapplied or can score high if it precisely backs up topic statements.

Scientist Advocacy Generally Does Not Hurt Credibility, With One Notable Exception

Direct Scientist Communication Is Perceived as More Trustworthy Than Relayed/Secondhand Communication

Most Science Communication Practice Still Follows a One-Way ""Deficit"" Model Rather Than Two-Way Dialogue

Policy Decisions Get Made Regardless of Scientist Participation, and Suffer in Rigor Without It