Search for: All records

We conducted mental model interviews in Aotearoa NZ to understand perspectives of uncertainty associated with natural hazards science. Such science contains many layers of interacting uncertainties, and varied understandings about what these are and where they come from creates communication challenges, impacting the trust in, and use of, science. To improve effective communication, it is thus crucial to understand the many diverse perspectives of scientific uncertainty.Participants included hazard scientists (e.g., geophysical, social, and other sciences), professionals with some scientific training (e.g., planners, policy analysts, emergency managers), and lay public participants with no advanced training in science (e.g., journalism, history, administration, art, or other domains). We present a comparative analysis of the mental model maps produced by participants, considering individuals’ levels of training and expertise in, and experience of, science.A qualitative comparison identified increasing map organization with science literacy, suggesting greater science training in, experience with, or expertise in, science results in a more organized and structured mental model of uncertainty. There were also language differences, with lay public participants focused more on perceptions of control and safety, while scientists focused on formal models of risk and likelihood.These findings are presented to enhance hazard, risk, and science communication. It is important to also identify ways to understand the tacit knowledge individuals already hold which may influence their interpretation of a message. The interview methodology we present here could also be adapted to understand different perspectives in participatory and co-development research. 

The science associated with assessing natural hazard phenomena and the risks they pose contains many layers of complex and interacting elements, resulting in diverse sources of uncertainty. This creates a challenge for effective communication, which must consider how people perceive that uncertainty. Thus, we conducted twenty-five mental model interviews in Aotearoa New Zealand with participants ranging from scientists to policy writers and emergency managers, and through to the public. The interviews included three phases: an initial elicitation of free thoughts about uncertainty, a mental model mapping activity, and a semi-structured interview protocol to ex- plore further questions about scientific processes and their personal philosophy of science. Quali- tative analysis led to the construction of key themes, including: (a) understanding that, in addi- tion to data sources, the ‘actors’ involved can also be sources of uncertainty; (b) acknowledging that factors such as governance and funding decisions partly determine uncertainty; (c) the influ- ence of assumptions about expected human behaviours contributing to “known unknowns'; and (d) the difficulty of defining what uncertainty actually is. Participants additionally highlighted the positive role of uncertainty for promoting debate and as a catalyst for further inquiry. They also demonstrated a level of comfort with uncertainty and advocated for ‘sitting with uncertain- ty’ for transparent reporting in advice. Additional influences included: an individual's under- standing of societal factors; the role of emotions; using outcomes as a scaffold for interpretation; and the complex and noisy communications landscape. Each of these require further investiga- tion to enhance the communication of scientific uncertainty. 

Abstract Konservat-Lagerstätten—deposits with exceptionally preserved fossils—vary in abundance across geographic and stratigraphic space due to paleoenvironmental heterogeneity. While oceanic anoxic events (OAEs) may have promoted preservation of marine lagerstätten, the environmental controls on their taphonomy remain unclear. Here, we provide new data on the mineralization of fossils in three Lower Jurassic Lagerstätten—Strawberry Bank (UK), Ya Ha Tinda (Canada), and Posidonia Shale (Germany) —and test the hypothesis that they were preserved under similar conditions. Biostratigraphy indicates that all three Lagerstätten were deposited during the Toarcian OAE (TOAE), and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) show that each deposit contains a variety of taxa preserved as phosphatized skeletons and tissues. Thus, despite their geographic and paleoenvironmental differences, all of these Lagerstätten were deposited in settings conducive to phosphatization, indicating that the TOAE fostered exceptional preservation in marine settings around the world. Phosphatization may have been fueled by phosphate delivery from climatically-driven sea level change and continental weathering, with anoxic basins acting as phosphorus traps.