COVID-19 and science advice on the ‘Grand Stage’: the metadata and linguistic choices in a scientific advisory groups’ meeting minutes

Hannah Baker (), Shauna Concannon, Matthias Meller, Katie Cohen, Alice Millington, Samuel Ward and Emily So
Additional contact information
Hannah Baker: University of Cambridge
Shauna Concannon: University of Cambridge
Matthias Meller: The Technical University of Munich
Katie Cohen: University of Cambridge
Alice Millington: University of Cambridge
Samuel Ward: University of Cambridge
Emily So: University of Cambridge

Palgrave Communications, 2022, vol. 9, issue 1, 1-16

Abstract: Abstract Science advice for governments attracted great scrutiny during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the public spotlight on institutions and individual experts—putting science advice on the ‘Grand Stage’. A review of the academic literature identified transparency, a plurality of expertise, the science and policy ‘boundary’, and consensus whilst addressing uncertainty as key themes. The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) has been the primary provider of coordinated scientific and technical advice to the UK Government during emergencies since 2009. Using the first 89 of SAGE’s meeting minutes (study period: 22 January 2020–13 May 2021), the ‘metadata’ and linguistic choices are analysed to identify how SAGE’s role and protocols are communicated. This includes understanding which experts were regularly taking part in discussions, the role of scientific experts in the science advisory system and their influence on policy choices, and the degree of consensus and uncertainty within this group of experts—all of which relate to the degree of transparency with the public. In addition, a temporal analysis examines how these practices, such as linguistically marking uncertainty, developed over the period studied. Linguistic markers indexing certainty and uncertainty increased, demonstrating a commitment to precise and accurate communication of the science, including ambiguities and the unknown. However, self-references to SAGE decreased over the period studied. The study highlights how linguistic analysis can be a useful approach for developing an understanding of science communication practices and scientific ambiguity. By considering how SAGE presents to those outside the process, the research calls attention to what remains ‘behind the scenes’ and consequently limits the public’s understanding of SAGE’s role in the COVID-19 response.

Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-022-01403-1 Abstract (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palcom:v:9:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-022-01403-1

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/palcomms/about

DOI: 10.1057/s41599-022-01403-1

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Palgrave Communications from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().