Untangling Trustworthiness and Uncertainty in Science: Implications for Science Education

Data Hunches: Incorporating Personal Knowledge into Visualizations

The trouble with data is that it frequently provides only an imperfect representation of a phenomenon of interest. Experts who are familiar with their datasets will often make implicit, mental corrections when analyzing a dataset, or will be cautious not to be overly confident about their findings if caveats are present. However, personal knowledge about the caveats of a dataset is typically not incorporated in a structured way, which is problematic if others who lack that knowledge interpret the data. In this work, we define such analysts' knowledge about datasets as data hunches. We differentiate data hunches from uncertainty and discuss types of hunches. We then explore ways of recording data hunches, and, based on a prototypical design, develop recommendations for designing visualizations that support data hunches. We conclude by discussing various challenges associated with data hunches, including the potential for harm and challenges for trust and privacy. We envision that data hunches will empower analysts to externalize their knowledge, facilitate collaboration and communication, and support the ability to learn from others' data hunches.

Starstruck by journal prestige and citation counts? On students’ bias and perceptions of trustworthiness according to clues in publication references

Research is becoming increasingly accessible to the public via open access publications, researchers’ social media postings, outreach activities, and popular disseminations. A healthy research discourse is typified by debates, disagreements, and diverging views. Consequently, readers may rely on the information available, such as publication reference attributes and bibliometric markers, to resolve conflicts. Yet, critical voices have warned about the uncritical and one-sided use of such information to assess research. In this study we wanted to get insight into how individuals without research training place trust in research based on clues present in publication references. A questionnaire was designed to probe respondents’ perceptions of six publication attributes. A total of 148 students responded to the questionnaire of which 118 were undergraduate students (with limited experience and knowledge of research) and 27 were graduate students (with some knowledge and experience of research). The results showed that the respondents were mostly influenced by the number of citations and the recency of publication, while author names, publication type, and publication origin were less influential. There were few differences between undergraduate and graduate students, with the exception that undergraduate students more strongly favoured publications with multiple authors over publications with single authors. We discuss possible implications for teachers that incorporate research articles in their curriculum.