Silje Kristiansen

The different audiences of science communication: A segmentation analysis of the Swiss population’s perceptions of science and their information and media use patterns:

Few studies have assessed whether populations can be divided into segments with different perceptions of science. We provide such an analysis and assess whether these segments exhibit specific patterns of media and information use. Based on representative survey data from Switzerland, we use latent class analysis to reconstruct four segments: the “Sciencephiles,” with strong interest for science, extensive knowledge, and a pronounced belief in its potential, who use a variety of sources intensively; the “Critically Interested,” also with strong interest and support for science but with less trust in it, who use similar sources but are more cautious toward them; the “Passive Supporters” with moderate levels of interest, trust, and knowledge and tempered perceptions of science, who use fewer sources; and the “Disengaged,” who are not interested in science, do not know much about it, harbor critical views toward it, and encounter it—if at all—mostly through television.

The gambler’s fallacy fallacy (fallacy)

Abstract The gambler’s fallacy is the irrational belief that prior outcomes in a series of events affect the probability of a future outcome, even though the events in question are independent and identically distributed. In this paper, we argue that in the standard account of the gambler’s fallacy, the gambler’s fallacy fallacy can arise: the irrational belief that all beliefs pertaining to the probabilities of sequences of outcomes constitute the gambler’s fallacy, when, in fact, they do not. Specifically, the odds of the probabilities of some sequences of outcomes can be epistemically rational in a given decision-making situation. Not only are such odds of probabilities of sequences of outcomes not the gambler’s fallacy, but they can be implemented as a simple heuristic for avoiding the gambler’s fallacy in risk-related decision-making. However, we have to be careful not to fall prey to a variant of the gambler’s fallacy, the gambler’s fallacy fallacy (fallacy), in which we do not calculate odds for the probabilities of sequences that matter, but rather simply believe that the raw probability for the occurrence of a sequence of outcomes is the probability for the last outcome in that sequence.