The key factors impacting on ccience communication effects in the WeChat official accounts: A theoretical framework of risk-benefit perceptions

Panqiang Niu, Shanghai University, China
Anang Masduki, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan, Indonesia
Caixie Tu, Shanghai University, China
Maria Efiyana, Shanghai University, China
Liu Jian, Children's Science and Education Channel, Hebei Radio and Television Station, China

 10.21831/jss.v19i2.53695

Abstract


By adopting the theoretical framework of Risk-Benefit perceptions, this study takes the popularization of Artificial Intelligence (AI) knowledge as an empirical object to test the key factors impacting on science communication effects in the WeChat official accounts. Results showed that science communication uncertainty produced both direct and indirect effects on science communication effects. The indirect effect was mainly mediated by perceived risk. Public trust negatively moderated the association between perceived uncertainty and perceived risk at a low trust level. Perceived entertainment had a positive effect on science communication effects in the benefit-perception perspective.


Keywords


key factors, science communication effects, communication uncertainty, WeChat official accounts, Artificial Intelligence

Full Text:

PDF

References


Baron RM and Kenny DA (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51(6): 1173-1182.

Bellaby P (2010) Uncertainties and risks in transitions to sustainable energy, and the part 'trust' might play in managing them: a comparison with the current pension crisis. Energy Policy 38(6): 2624-2630.

Berger CR and Calabrese RJ (1975) Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research 1(2): 99-112.

Bhattacherjee A (2001) Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly 25(3): 351-370.

Brewer PR and Ley BL (2011) Multiple exposures: scientific controversy, the media, and public responses to bisphenol A. Science Communication 33(1): 76-97.

Campbell P (2011) Understanding the receivers and the reception of science’s uncertain messages. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 369(1956): 4891-4912.

Campolo A, Sanfilippo M, Whittaker M and Crawford K (2017) AI now 2017 report. https://ainowinstitute.org/AI_Now_2017_Report.pdf.

Cao YP and Li HM (2015) The impact of the social function of popular science websites on the communication of science and technology: Taking ‘Zhihu’ as an example. Public communication of science and technology (20): 121-123.

Cha M, Haddadi H, Benevenuto F and Gummadi K (2010) Measuring user influence in twitter: the million follower fallacy. 4th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM): Washington.

Chang J and Yang JM (2009) An empirical study on the relationship among baidupedia users' participating behavior and motivations. Studies in Science of Science 27(8): 95-101.

Chen G (2014) Uncertainty communication: issue competition, discourse order and media's knowledge reproduction in the communication of "GM debate". Journalism and Communication 21(7): 17-34.

Cheng HD, Wang YL and Hou MC (2020) On the uncertainty and governance of artificial intelligence. Studies in Dialectics of Nature 36(2): 38-43.

Chinese Science Communication (2017) The acquisition of popular science and communication behavior among mobile Internet users in 2016. https://news.qq.com/cross/20170303/K23DV6O1.html.

Connor M and Siegrist M (2010) Factors influencing people’s acceptance of gene technology: the role of knowledge, health expectations, naturalness, and social trust. Science Communication 32(4): 514-538.

Cunningham SM (1967) The Major Dimensions of Perceived Risk. In: Cox DF (eds) Risk taking and information handling in consumer behavior. Boston: Harvard University Press, MA, pp. 82-108.

Davis FD (1986) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3): 319-339.

Ding D, Maibach EW, Zhao XQ, Roser-Renouf C and Leiserowitz A (2011) Support for climate policy and societal action are linked to perceptions about the scientific agreement. Nature Climate Change 1(9): 462-466.

Du JQ (2018) The key factors of college students' usage attitude towards mobile live broadcasting. Ph D Dissertation: Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University.

Friedman S M, Rogers CL and Dunwoody S (1999) Communicating Uncertainty: Media Coverage of New and Controversial Science. New York: Routledge.

Fontaine G, Maheu-Cadotte MA, Lavallée A, Mailhot T, Rouleau G, Bouix-Picasso J and Bourbonnais A (2019) Communicating Science in the Digital and Social Media Ecosystem: Scoping Review and Typology of Strategies Used by Health Scientists. JMIR public health and surveillance 5(3): 1-14.

Gao HT (2020) Explanation of the black-box and uncertainty of AI. Electronic Engineering & Product World 27(2): 88-90.

Gefen D (2000) E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust. Omega 28(6): 725-737.

Gong WQ, Tu CX and Jiang LC (2015) Stigmatized portrayals of single women: a content analysis of news coverage on single women and single men in China. Journal of Gender Studies 26(2): 197–211

Hallman WK, Hebden WC, Aquino HL, Cuite CL and Lang, JT (2003) Public Perceptions of Genetically Modified Foods: A National Study of American Knowledge and Opinion. (Publication number RR-1003-004). New Brunswick, New Jersey; Food Policy Institute, Cook College, Rutgers - The State University of New Jersey.

Han PK, Moser RP and Klein WM (2007) Perceived ambiguity about cancer prevention recommendations: associations with cancer-related perceptions and behaviors in a U.S. population survey. Health Expectations 10(4): 321-336.

Hayes AF (2018) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis (Second Edition). New York: Guilford Press.

Hong SJ and Tam KY (2006) Understanding the Adoption of Multipurpose Information Appliances: The Case of Mobile Data Services. Information Systems Research 17(2): 162-179.

Hou QW (2018) Uncertainty in Weibo Science Communication. Master thesis, Beijing: Party School of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China.

Hu YJ (2019) Public Understanding of Science: An Empirical Study on Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power Construction in China. Frontiers in Social Science 8(5): 748-759.

Jia HP, Wang DP, Miao WS and Zhu HJ (2017) Encountered but not engaged: Examining the use of social media for science communication by Chinese scientists. Science Communication 39(11): 1-27.

Jin JB, Jiang SJ, Chen AF and Shen Y (2017) Science Communication Effects on New Media Platforms: Based on the Case of WeChat. Journal of China University of Geosciences (Social Sciences Edition) 17(2):112-124.

Jin JB, Wu O, Chu YJ, Lin CL and Zhang J (2018) The Contrast of Knowledge and Action of Scientists in Science Communication: The Perspective of Value Identity and Institutional Rewards and Punishments. Journalism and Communication 25(2): 20-33.

Kim HW, Chan HC and Gupta S (2007) Value-based Adoption of Mobile Internet：An Empirical Investigation. Decision Support Systems 43 (1): 111-126.

Kuang WB, Wu XL (2019) Research on the Evaluation Index System for Effect of Health Communication based on WeChat Official Accounts. Journal of International Communication 41(1): 153-176.

Li Q and Li XX (2016) An empirical study on shopping acceptance of WeChat platform based on TAM. Statistics and Decision (19): 54-57.

Liu HJ (2009) Three Models and Three Stages of Science Communication in China. Science Popularization 4(2): 10-18.

Lv B (2021) Weibo Vlog Usage Behavior Based on TAM. Ph D dissertation, Dalian: Dalian University of Technology.

Majid U, Wasim A, Bakshi S, Truong J (2020) Knowledge, (mis-)conceptions, risk perception, and behavior change during pandemics: A scoping review of 149 studies. Public Understanding of Science 29(8): 777-799.

McKnight DH, Choudhury V and Kacmar C (2002) The Impact of Initial Consumer Trust on Intentions to Transact with a Web Site: A Trust Building Model. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 11(3-4): 297-323.

Mitchell VW (1999) Consumer perceived risk: conceptualizations and models. European Journal of Marking 33(1/2): 163-195.

Moon JW and Kim YG (2001) Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information & Management 38(4): 217-217.

Morgan MG and Henrion M (1992) Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.

Author (2020) The effect evaluation of new media technology communication in my country: Taking the WeChat public account of science and technology as an example. Contemporary communication (1): 48-51.

Ouyang RR (2015) Factors affecting the micro-channel user behavior circle of friends: Based on Students in Jiangxi University of empirical investigation. Ph D dissertation, Nanchang: Jiangxi Normal University.

Pan Y, Zhang X, Gao L (2010) Research on the Determinants of Purchasing Intention in Online Shopping——From the Perspective of Trust and Perceived Risk. China Industrial Economy (7): 115-124.

Patrick HW (1992) Artificial Intelligence (3rd Edition). Boston: Addison Wesley.

Rauniar R, Rawski G, Yang J and Johnson B (2014) Technology acceptance model (TAM) and social media usage: an empirical study on Facebook. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 27(1): 6-30.

Schuck A and De Vreese C (2016) Between Risk and Opportunity. European Journal of Communication 21(1), 5-32.

Shanteau J (2000) Why do experts disagree?. In: Green B, Cressy R, Delmar F, Eisenberg T, Howcraft B, Lewis M, Schoenmaker D, Shanteau J and Vivian R (eds.) Risk Behaviour and Risk Management in Business Life. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press, pp. 186-196.

Shi GL (2017) The Influence of Smartphone Enterprises' Innovation Behavior on Consumers' Purchase Intention Based on Structural Equation Model. Master thesis, Shenzhen: Shenzhen University.

Sjoberg L (2001) Limits of knowledge and the limited importance of trust. Risk Analysis: An International Journal 21(1): 189-198.

Stocking SH (2010) Uncertainty in science communication. In: Priest SH. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Science and Technology Communication. Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 919-921.

Sun X, Feng Y and Fan M (2016) Statistical test of key factors of TAM mobile social media usage behavior. Statistics and Decision (17): 101-104.

Vaishya R, Javaid M, Khan IH and Haleem A (2020) Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications for COVID-19 pandemic. Diabetes & metabolic syndrome 14(4): 337-339.

Varner J (2014) Scientific outreach: toward effective public engagement with biological science. BioScience 64(4): 333–340.

Wan MN, Liu L, Qiu J and Yang XL (2011) Collective Action: Definition, Psychological Mechanism and Behavior Measurement. Advances in Psychological Science 19(5): 723-730.

Wu CG (2018) The key factors of mobile learning APP use intention of college students in normal colleges. Ph D, Xian: Shaanxi Normal University.

Wu X, Wei D and Wu XN (2019) Research progress on influences of communication and trust mechanism on risk awareness of patients. Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing 25(34): 4526-4531.

Wu TT (2019) Key factors of the Science Communication effects of genetically modified food safety: the perspective of risk society. Master thesis, Wuhan: Huazhong University of Science and Technology.

Xing JN (2011) An empirical study on public cognition of scientist’s image and its reflection. Ph D dissertation, Shenyang: Northeastern University.

Yang S (2020) The key factors of users' acceptance of WeChat reading promotion services in public library. Master thesis, Chongqing: Xinan University.

Yang Y (2019) World Economic Forum poll: widespread use of artificial intelligence sparks public concer. https://www.chinanews.com.cn/cj/2019/07-01/8880287.shtml.

Zhang YZ and Li HY (2019) The security risks of artificial intelligence technology need urgent attention. China Economic and Trade Herald (9): 56-59.

Zheng ZL and Zhang QT (2020) WeChat knowledge sharing behavior based on TPB and TAM model. New Century Library (4): 62-68.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/jss.v19i2.53695

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2023 Panqiang Niu, Anang Masduki, Caixie Tu, Maria Efiyana

Supervised by

RJI Main logo


Our Journal has been Indexed by

           


Creative Commons License
Journal of Social Studies (JSS) by http://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/jss is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

View My Stats