Abstract:Expertise is a prerequisite for communicator credibility, entailing the knowledge and ability to be accurate. Trust also is essential to communicator credibility. Audiences view trustworthiness as the motivation to be truthful. Identifying whom to trust follows systematic principles. People decide quickly another's apparent intent: Who is friend or foe, on their side or not, or a cooperator or competitor. Those seemingly on their side are deemed warm (friendly, trustworthy). People then decide whether the other is competent to enact those intents. Perception of scientists, like other social perceptions, involves inferring both their apparent intent (warmth) and capability (competence). To illustrate, we polled adults online about typical American jobs, rated as American society views them, on warmth and competence dimensions, as well as relevant emotions. Ambivalently perceived high-competence but low-warmth, "envied" professions included lawyers, chief executive officers, engineers, accountants, scientists, and researchers. Being seen as competent but cold might not seem problematic until one recalls that communicator credibility requires not just status and expertise but also trustworthiness (warmth). Other research indicates the risk from being enviable. Turning to a case study of scientific communication, another online sample of adults described public attitudes toward climate scientists specifically. Although distrust is low, the apparent motive to gain research money is distrusted. The literature on climate science communicators agrees that the public trusts impartiality, not persuasive agendas. Overall, communicator credibility needs to address both expertise and trustworthiness. Scientists have earned audiences' respect, but not necessarily their trust. Discussing, teaching, and sharing information can earn trust to show scientists' trustworthy intentions.

Capably Communicating Science

Communicating Science: A Shared Responsibility

It is essential to connect: Evaluating a Science Communication Boot Camp

Understanding scientists' communication challenges at the intersection of climate and agriculture.

Public understanding of science: Communicating in the midst of a pandemic

Addressing Challenges to Public Understanding of Science: Epistemic Cognition, Motivated Reasoning, and Conceptual Change

Gaining trust as well as respect in communicating to motivated audiences about science topics

Scientists’ views about communication objectives

Who Speaks for Science?

Popularizing Science Among the Grassroots: Development, Existing Problems, and Countermeasures

Science, Values, and Science Communication: Competencies for Pushing Beyond the Deficit Model

Effectively Communicating Climate Science beyond Academia: Harnessing the Heterogeneity of Climate Knowledge

The lure of rationality: Why does the deficit model persist in science communication?

Bringing Policymakers to Science Through Communication: A Perspective From Latin America

Scientific Outreach: Toward Effective Public Engagement with Biological Science

Changing the Culture of Science Communication Training for Junior Scientists

Science communication and public trust in science

Engaging scientists in science communication: The effect of social proof and meaning

Reflecting on the Science in Science Communication

Science Communication Demands a Critical Approach That Centers Inclusion, Equity, and Intersectionality

Effective Communication of Scientific Results