Editing Credibility (section)

==In science==
{{Further|Scientific integrity}}
''Scientific credibility'' has been defined as the extent to which science in general is recognized as a source of reliable information about the world.<ref>{{cite book |author= Bocking, Stephen |title=Nature's experts: science, politics, and the environment |url= https://archive.org/details/naturesexperts00step_0 |url-access= registration |publisher=Rutgers University Press |location=New Brunswick, NJ |year=2004 |page=[https://archive.org/details/naturesexperts00step_0/page/164 164] |isbn= 0-8135-3398-8}}</ref> The term has also been applied more narrowly, as an assessment of the credibility of the work of an individual scientist or a field of research. Here, the phrase refers to how closely the work in question adheres to scientific principles, such as the [[scientific method]].<ref>{{cite book |author=Alkin, Marvin C. |title=Evaluation roots: tracing theorists' views and influences |publisher=Sage |location=Thousand Oaks, Calif |year=2004 |page=134 |isbn=0-7619-2894-4}}</ref> The method most commonly used to assess the quality of science is [[peer review]] and then publication as part of the [[scientific literature]].<ref>{{cite book |author=Bocking, Stephen |title=Nature's experts: science, politics, and the environment |url=https://archive.org/details/naturesexperts00step_0 |url-access=registration |publisher=Rutgers University Press |location=New Brunswick, NJ |year=2004 |page=[https://archive.org/details/naturesexperts00step_0/page/165 165] |isbn=0-8135-3398-8}}</ref> Other approaches include the collaborative assessment of a topic by a group of experts, this process can produce reviews such as those published by the [[Cochrane Collaboration]],<ref>[http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/revstruc.htm What is a Cochrane review]. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120116021144/http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/revstruc.htm |date=16 January 2012 }} ''The Cochrane Collaboration'', Accessed 5 January 2009.</ref> or the [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]].<ref name= Agrawala1998>{{Cite journal |last=Agrawala |first=S. |year=1998 |title=Structural and Process History of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |journal=Climatic Change |volume= 39 |issue=4 |pages=621–642 |doi=10.1023/A:1005312331477 |bibcode=1998ClCh...39..621A |s2cid=153213293 }}</ref>

The 2008 credibility article written by Peter Alagona highlights that, “In environmental science, credibility is one of the most referenced yet the least comprehended concepts.” This lack of understanding is due to the public often confusing credibility with trust because of shared characteristics, such as reliability and dependability. To be credible in the scientific field, researchers are to demonstrate [[expert]]ise, reliability and objectivity, through methods such as peer and systematic review, and [[Experiment|experimental studies]]. Alagona states that “the credibility of scientific research shapes the public’s trust and influence policies.” Therefore, scientific credibility means that when research is seen as trustworthy, it can shape various rules and regulations. This reinforces the public’s trust, belief, and acceptance, as these guidelines are based on credible scientific findings.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Alagona |first=Peter S. |date=2008 |title=Credibility. Conservation Biology, 22(6),1365-1367 |url=https://history.ucsb.edu/wp-content/uploads/histpublications/files/08234-alagona_2008c.pdf}}</ref>

The general public can give a great deal of weight to perceptions of scientific authority in their decisions on controversial issues that involve scientific research, such as [[biotechnology]].<ref name="Brossard2007">{{Cite journal |last1=Brossard |first1=Dominique |last2=Nisbet |first2=Matthew C. |year=2007 |title=Deference to Scientific Authority Among a Low Information Public: Understanding U.S. Opinion on Agricultural Biotechnology |journal=International Journal of Public Opinion Research |volume=19 |issue=1 |page=24 |doi= 10.1093/ijpor/edl003 |doi-access=}}
{{cite press release |author=Dennis Chaptman |date=1 May 2007 |title=Survey examines Americans' trust in science |website=University of Wisconsin–Madison |url=http://www.news.wisc.edu/13734}}</ref> However, both the credibility and authority of science is questioned by groups with non-mainstream views, such as some advocates of [[alternative medicine]],<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=O'callaghan |first1=F. V. |last2= Jordan |first2=N. |year=2003 |title=Postmodern values, attitudes and the use of complementary medicine |journal=Complementary Therapies in Medicine |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=28–32 |doi=10.1016/S0965-2299(02)00109-7 |pmid=12667972 }}</ref> or those who dispute the [[scientific consensus]] on a topic, such as denialists of [[AIDS denialism|AIDS]].<ref>{{cite journal |author=Smith TC, Novella SP |title=HIV denial in the Internet era |journal=PLOS Med. |volume=4 |issue=8 |pages=e256 |date=August 2007 |pmid=17713982 |pmc=1949841 |doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040256 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |author=Epstein, Steven |title=Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge |journal=Medicine and Society |pages=1–466 |url=https://archive.org/details/impurescienceaid00epst |url-access=registration |publisher=University of California Press |location=Berkeley |year=1996 |isbn=0-520-21445-5 |pmid=11619509 }}</ref> [[Political endorsement]]s can reduce non-[[Partisan (politics)|partisan]] scientific credibility.<ref name="r048">{{cite journal | last=Lupia | first=Arthur | title=Political endorsements can affect scientific credibility | journal=Nature | publisher=Springer Science and Business Media LLC | volume=615 | issue=7953 | date=20 March 2023 | issn=0028-0836 | doi=10.1038/d41586-023-00799-3 | doi-access=free | pages=590–591| pmid=36941377 | bibcode=2023Natur.615..590L }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last=Zhang | first=Floyd Jiuyun | title=Political endorsement by Nature and trust in scientific expertise during COVID-19 | journal=Nature Human Behaviour | publisher=Springer Science and Business Media LLC | volume=7 | date=20 March 2023 | issue=5 | issn=2397-3374 | doi=10.1038/s41562-023-01537-5 | doi-access=free | pages=696–706 | pmid=36941467 | pmc=10202798 }}</ref>