Research

This research area explores the significant role of seemingly apolitical and unscientific social media content in shaping public perceptions of science and politics. Despite being often disregarded as mere entertainment, influencers and lifestyle content on social media exert a disproportionate influence, particularly among demographics commonly overlooked in science communication, such as women and younger audiences.

We find that consuming aspirational wellness content on social media is associated with anti-intellectual attitudes and health misperceptions, and that trusting influencers for political information can help uninvolved audiences navigate political media, while increasing election misperceptions.

USDA Hatch-funded research is currently investigating how Instagram influencers inform beliefs about nutrition and the way that appealing images spread accurate and inaccurate information online.

 

One consequence of these social divides is that many now believe it is better to “do your own research” (DYOR) than to rely on mainstream news and traditional expertise. Though intuitively appealing, my work has found that people who advocate for DYOR rely more on partisan news and develop less accurate beliefs over time.

They’re Not Like Us

 

My research explores public perceptions of expertise amid diminishing trust in traditional institutions like journalism and escalating concerns about misinformation. We find that social divisions lead some to perceive scientists as a threatening social group, and that science influencers on social media may inadvertently exacerbate social divisions around science with 'us versus them' rhetoric.

Polarization & Disagreement

 

My work investigates the prevalence and effects of scientific disagreements in media to better understand how people evaluate uncertain information.

In this research, I have used computational content-analytic methods to measure politicization and polarization in climate change news and COVID-19 news.

I pair large-scale content analyses with experimental work to investigating effects of civil and uncivil scientific disagreement messages and the efficacy of consensus messages in the context of climate change.

Publications

  • Hasell, A., & Chinn, S. (2023). The Political Influence of Lifestyle Influencers? Examining the Relationship Between Aspirational Social Media Use and Anti-Expert Attitudes and Beliefs. Social Media+ Society, 9(4), 20563051231211945. article here

  • Chinn, S., & Hasell, A. (2023). Support for “doing your own research” is associated with COVID-19 misperceptions and scientific mistrust. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review. article here

  • Chinn, Sedona, Ariel Hasell, Dan Hiaeshutter-Rice (2023). Mapping Digital Wellness Content: Implications for Health, Science, and Political Communication Research. Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media. article here

  • Chinn, S., Hasell, A., Roden, J., & Zichettella, B. (2023). Threatening experts: Correlates of viewing scientists as a social threat. Public Understanding of Science, 0(0). article here

  • Chinn, Sedona, Hiaeshutter-Rice, Dan, & Chen, Kaiping. (2023). How Science Influencers Polarize Supportive and Skeptical Communities Around Politicized Science: A Cross-Platform and Over-Time Comparison. Political Communication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2201174 article here

  • Chinn, Sedona & Ariel Hasell (2023). How Different Uses of Social Media Inform Perceptions of Offline Social Norms and Changes in Vaccine Intentions. Health Communication. article here

  • Hawkins, I., & Chinn, S. (2023). Populist views of science: how social media, political affiliation, and Alt-Right support affect scientific attitudes in the United States. Information, Communication & Society, 1-18.

  • Chinn, Sedona, Dan Hiaeshutter-Rice, P. Sol Hart & Brendon M.H. Larson (2023). Testing How Militaristic and Xenophobic Language Affects Engagement with Facebook Posts about Invasive Species. Environmental Communication.

  • Chinn, Sedona & Ariel Hassel (2021). Uniquely disgusting? Physiological disgust and attitudes toward GM food and other food and health technologies. Journal of Science Communication. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.20070205

  • Chinn, Sedona & Sol Hart (2021). Can’t You All Just Get Along? Effects of Scientific Disagreement and Incivility on Attention to and Trust in Science. Science Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/10755470211054446 article here

  • Chinn, Sedona & Sol Hart (2021). Effects of Consensus Messages and Political Ideology on Climate Change Attitudes: Inconsistent Findings and the Effect of a Pretest. Climatic Change. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03200-2 article here

  • Hiaeshutter-Rice, Dan, Sedona Chinn & Kaiping Chen (2021). Platform Effects on Alternative Influencer Content: Understanding how Audiences and Channels Shape Misinformation Online. Frontiers in Political Science. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2021.642394 article here

  • Chinn, Sedona & Sol Hart (2021). Climate Change Consensus Messages Cause Reactance. Environmental Communication. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2021.1910530 article here

  • Chinn, Sedona & Brian Weeks (2020). Effects of Competing Evidence in Debates about Science. Environmental Communication. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2020.1837900

  • Sol Hart, Sedona Chinn, & Stuart Soroka (2020). Politicization and Polarization in COVID-19 News Coverage. Science Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547020950735 article here

  • Chinn, Sedona & Josh Pasek (2020). Some Deficits and Some Misperceptions: Linking Partisanship with Climate Change Cognitions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edaa007

  • Chinn, Sedona, P. Sol Hart, & Stuart Soroka (2020). Politicization and Polarization in Climate Change News Content, 1985-2017. Science Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019900290 article here

  • Chinn, Sedona, Daniel S. Lane, & P. Sol Hart (2018). In Consensus We Trust? Persuasive Effects of Scientific Consensus Communication. Public Understanding of Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662518791094

  • Hart, P. Sol, Daniel S. Lane, & Sedona Chinn (2018). A Failure to Find a Difference in the Effectiveness of Help Appeals Focused on an Identified Victim Compared to the Many. PLoS 1. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199535