An official website of the United States government
Key message: -Governments claimed to be following scientific advice during the pandemic to legitimise decisions -Advice should be autonomous to ensure that governments do not simply seek advice that aligns with what they want to hear -Transparency is also essential to know who gave the advice and what the government did with it -The UK’s advice system was not autonomous, being designed to answer questions posed by government with advisers appointed by government -The system became more transparent as a result of political pressure
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on December 28, 2025
From evidence to advice in France, Germany, and the UK: transparency, accountability, and participation in pandemic science advice
Politicians often claim to be "following science" but their claims are, reasonably, disputed. To claim to be following the science can mean that scientific evidence affects or legitimates decisions. The evidence that politicians are following science often comes from formal systems of advice that translate science into advice. We study the systems that informed policy in France, Germany, and the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that while in all three countries politicians had incentive to prefer private advice tailored to their needs, more transparent and independent advice appeared to contribute more to good policymaking and implementation, including by enhancing government's current and future accountability for their decisions.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2122228
- PAR ID:
- 10568451
- Publisher / Repository:
- Springer Nature
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of public health policy
- Edition / Version:
- .
- Volume:
- .
- Issue:
- .
- ISSN:
- 0197-5897
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- .
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- Research public health health policy pandemic
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: . Other: .
- Size(s):
- .
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Past research on advice-taking has suggested that people are often insensitive to the level of advice independence when combining forecasts from advisors. However, this has primarily been tested for cases in which people receive numeric forecasts. Recent work by Mislavsky and Gaertig (2022) shows that people sometimes employ different strategies when combining verbal versus numeric forecasts about the likelihood of future events. Specifically, likelihood judgments based on two verbal forecasts (e.g., "rather likely") are more often extreme (relative to the forecasts) than are likelihood judgments based on two numeric forecasts (e.g., "70% probability"). The goal of the present research was to investigate whether advice-takers' use of combination strategies can be sensitive to advice independence when differences in independence are highly salient and whether sensitivity to advice independence depends on the format in which advice is given. In two studies, we found that advice-takers became more extreme with their own likelihood estimate when combining forecasts from advisors who use separate evidence, as opposed to the same evidence. We also found that two verbal forecasts generally resulted in more extreme combined likelihood estimates than two numeric forecasts. However, the results did not suggest that sensitivity to advice independence depends on the format of advice.more » « less
-
Verifying political claims is a challenging task, as politicians can use various tactics to subtly misrepresent the facts for their agenda. Existing automatic fact-checking systems fall short here, and their predictions like "half-true" are not very useful in isolation, since it is unclear which parts of a claim are true or false. In this work, we focus on decomposing a complex claim into a comprehensive set of yes-no subquestions whose answers influence the veracity of the claim. We present CLAIMDECOMP, a dataset of decompositions for over 1000 claims. Given a claim and its verification paragraph written by fact-checkers, our trained annotators write subquestions covering both explicit propositions of the original claim and its implicit facets, such as additional political context that changes our view of the claim's veracity. We study whether state-of-the-art pre-trained models can learn to generate such subquestions. Our experiments show that these models generate reasonable questions, but predicting implied subquestions based only on the claim (without consulting other evidence) remains challenging. Nevertheless, we show that predicted subquestions can help identify relevant evidence to fact-check the full claim and derive the veracity through their answers, suggesting that claim decomposition can be a useful piece of a fact-checking pipeline.more » « less
-
Abstract In this article, we examine how elementary classroom teachers who are pursuing their Elementary Mathematics Specialist certification—who we refer to as Elementary Mathematics Specialists in Training (EMSTs)—are positioned in their advice and information networks for mathematics. Analyzing the advice networks of six elementary schools in one district, we found that EMSTs were sought out by more individuals than other teachers, and when sought out by others, provided advice at a greater frequency than formal leaders. EMSTs' advice‐interactions were often with grade‐level peers, with interactions in the same grade occurring at a greater frequency than those spanning grade levels. We also found that, in the school with a formal mathematics‐specific leader, advice interactions were primarily directed at the formal leader, including the advice‐seeking of the EMSTs at that school. Based on our findings, we conclude with implications for how teacher education programs and school administrators can support mathematics teacher leaders in enacting leadership from their classrooms.more » « less
-
Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) devices transmit patients' medical indicators (e.g., blood pressure) from the patient's home testing equipment to their healthcare providers, in order to monitor chronic conditions such as hypertension. AI systems have the potential to enhance access to timely medical advice based on the data that RPM devices produce. In this paper, we report on three studies investigating how the severity of users' medical condition (normal vs. high blood pressure), security risk (low vs. modest vs. high risk), and medical advice source (human doctor vs. AI) influence user perceptions of advisor trustworthiness and willingness to disclose RPM-acquired information. We found that trust mediated the relationship between the advice source and users' willingness to disclose health information: users trust doctors more than AI and are more willing to disclose their RPM-acquired health information to a more trusted advice source. However, we unexpectedly discovered that conditional on trust, users disclose RPM-acquired information more readily to AI than to doctors. We observed that the advice source did not influence perceptions of security and privacy risks. We conclude by discussing how our findings can support the design of RPM applications.more » « less
