Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Should We Retire the Concept of Source Credibility? An Experimental Exploration of When Credibility Is (and Is Not) Useful

  • Emily A. Andrews*
  • , Nathan Walter
  • , Erga Atad
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Perceived source credibility is fundamental to effective science communication. Recent years, however, have seen science become polarized and expert authority erode, complicating the notion that credibility equals persuasion. Two experiments address this tension, focusing on subcomponents of perceived source credibility—expertise and trustworthiness—for expert (N = 474) and nonexpert sources (N = 411). By manipulating the order by which participants learn about the source’s position on a scientific topic relative to their qualifications, the findings delineate when and how source credibility cues influence science communication, introducing nuance to the idea that credible sources can effectively communicate about value-laden topics.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)626-647
Number of pages22
JournalScience Communication
Volume48
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2026
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2025

Keywords

  • climate change
  • experiment
  • expertise
  • source credibility
  • trust

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Should We Retire the Concept of Source Credibility? An Experimental Exploration of When Credibility Is (and Is Not) Useful'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this