郭施宏,谭欣

• 1:北京工业大学社会学院
• 2:北京社会管理研究基地

摘要(Abstract)：

政府借助专家发声是否能获得更好的效果?本研究以“7·31北京暴雨”灾害事件为情境，基于叙事式政策框架和危机情境沟通理论，通过调查实验，比较了官员发声和专家发声对政府灾害处置公众满意度的影响。研究发现，第一，官员发声的公众满意度显著高于专家发声；第二，实名专家发声的公众满意度显著高于匿名专家发声，公众对专家的态度主要针对专家群体，而非个人；第三，公众的灾害经历对于政府灾害处置满意度具有重要调节作用，受灾影响大的公众在比较官员发声与专家发声时，表现出更大的满意度差异。在对政府声誉威胁较小的自然灾害情境中，政府借助专家发声的效果不如政府自己发声；如果政府借助专家发声，那么选择专家实名发声比匿名发声效果更好。本研究揭示了公众对官员和专家叙事的复杂态度，为政府危机决策和社会动员提供了实践思路，并通过理论融合深化了对叙事角色复杂性的理解。

关键词(KeyWords)： 政策叙事;风险沟通;气候灾害;气候政策;行为公共政策

Abstract:

Keywords:

基金项目(Foundation): 国家自然科学基金青年项目“行为公共治理视角下气候政策执行有效性研究”(项目批准号:72304024);; 中国气象局政策研究气象软科学课题“气象灾害政策叙事的社会动员效应研究”(项目批准号:2024MSXM23);; 北方工业大学北京城市治理研究基地重点课题“行为公共政策视角下北京市基层社会治理动员策略研究”(项目批准号:2024CSZL06)的资助

作者(Author): 郭施宏,谭欣

参考文献(References)：

• 陈慧敏，朱泽宇，于北辰，等.2023.公共卫生危机中政府信任、科学家信任与社会焦虑——基于新冠肺炎疫情网络舆论的观察[J].当代传播，(3):44-52.Chen H M,Zhu Z Y,Yu B C,et al.2023.Government trust,scientist trust and social anxiety in public health crisis:An observation based on online public opinion on the novel coronavirus pneumonia epidemic[J].Contemporary Communication,(3):44-52.(in Chinese)
• 陈强，赵汉卿，李彤钰.2024.政务短视频对公众参与的差异化影响——基于危机与后危机情境的比较研究[J].北京航空航天大学学报(社会科学版),37(2):136-146.Chen Q,Zhao H Q,Li T Y.2024.Differential impact of government short videos on citizen engagement:A comparative study based on crisis and post-crisis situations[J].Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics (Social Sciences Edition),37(2):136-146.(in Chinese)
• 陈智，朱婷婷.2023.“建议专家不要建议”的多元复杂成因探析——以不信任为视角[J].天府新论，(5):97-106.Chen Z,Zhu T T.2023.The multiple and complex causes of “advise the experts not to advise”—Based on the perspective of distrust[J].New Horizons from Tianfu,(5):97-106.(in Chinese)
• 戴佳，曾繁旭，郭倩.2015.风险沟通中的专家依赖：以转基因技术报道为例[J].新闻与传播研究，22(5):32-45.Dai J,Zeng F X,Guo Q.2015.Dependence on experts in risk communication:An analysis on reports of genetic modification technology[J].Journalism & Communication,22(5):32-45.(in Chinese)
• 付佳，喻国明.2022.表达的具象度与距离感：危机传播模式中两个关键性变量的效应评测[J].国际新闻界，44(12):84-108.Fu J,Yu G M.2022.The concreteness of expression and the distance perception:Effect evaluation of two key variables in the crisis communication model[J].Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication,44(12):84-108.(in Chinese)
• 郭喨，张学义.2017.“专家信任”及其重建策略：一项实证研究[J].自然辩证法通讯，39(4):82-92.Guo L,Zhang X Y.2017.Public trust in experts and its rebuilding:An empirical study[J].Journal of Dialectics of Nature,39(4):82-92.(in Chinese)
• 郭跃，何林晟，苏竣.2020.“工具—叙事—反馈”:一个行为公共政策的研究框架[J].中国行政管理，(5):71-78.Guo Y,He L S,Su J.2020.Instruments,narrative and feedback:A framework of behavioral public policy[J].Chinese Public Administration,(5):71-78.(in Chinese)
• 洪岩璧，赵延东.2019.灾后重建中的资源再分配与健康不平等基于三期汶川地震重建调查[J].社会，39(6):214-237.Hong Y B,Zhao Y D.2019.Resource redistribution and health inequality in post-disaster recovery:On three surveys of Wenchuan earthquake recovery (2008—2011)[J].Chinese Journal of Sociology,39(6):214-237.(in Chinese)
• 江艇.2022.因果推断经验研究中的中介效应与调节效应[J].中国工业经济，(5):100-120.Jiang T.2022.Mediating effects and moderating effects in causal inference[J].China Industrial Economics,(5):100-120.(in Chinese)
• 李文钊.2017.叙事式政策框架：探究政策过程中的叙事效应[J].公共行政评论，10(3):141-163.Li W Z.2017.Narrative policy framework:Exploring the narrative impact on the policy process[J].Journal of Public Administration,10(3):141-163.(in Chinese)
• 李修仓，张颖娴，李威，等.2023.“23·7”京津冀暴雨极端性特征及对我国城市防汛的启示[J].中国防汛抗旱，33(11):13-18.Li X C,Zhang Y X,Li W,et al.2023.Extreme characteristics of “23·7” heavy rain in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei and its implications for urban flood control in China[J].China Flood & Drought Management,33(11):13-18.(in Chinese)
• 李晓静.2020.突发公共卫生事件的信息来源、媒介信任与防控研究——以新冠肺炎疫情为例[J].图书与情报，(2):19-24.Li X J.2020.Information source,media trust,and preventive control in public health emergency:Taking COVID-19 as an example[J].Library & Information,(2):19-24.(in Chinese)
• 刘振，闫宏妍.2023.“是什么”和“说什么”:企业危机修辞中的情境确认与框架选择[J].传媒观察，(8):82-92.Liu Z,Yan H Y.2023.“What is it” and “what does it say”:Situational confirmation and frame selection strategies in corporate crisis rhetoric[J].Media Observer,(8):82-92.(in Chinese)
• 吕书鹏，高功成.2024.“建议专家不要建议”:公共卫生事件中的大众“信息厌倦”研究[J].公共管理评论，6(1):5-25.Lyu S P,Gao G C.2024.“Advise the experts not to advise”:Research on “message fatigue” during public health emergencies[J].China Public Administration Review,6(1):5-25.(in Chinese)
• 宋欢迎.2020.社交媒体危机传播国际研究的路径、特点及启示——基于2008—2019年Academic Source Complete-EBSCO数据库的分析[J].电子政务，(6):21-31.Song H Y.2020.The path,characteristics and enlightenment of international research on social media crisis communication:An analysis based on the Academic Source Complete-EBSCO database from 2008 to 2019[J].E-Government,(6):21-31.(in Chinese)
• 王聪，陆成宽，詹琰.2022.社会争议事件中公众对媒体上科学家的信任研究——以中国“PX”系列事件为例[J].自然辩证法研究，38(6):71-75.Wang C,Lu C K,Zhan Y.2022.Research on the public trust in scientists on the media under social controversy:Take the “PX” series events in China as an example[J].Studies in Dialectics of Nature,38(6):71-75.(in Chinese)
• 王化起，龙书芹.2020.政府能力、敬业精神与经济损失——疫情时期政府信任变化的影响因素分析[J].东南大学学报(哲学社会科学版),22(5):112-120.Wang H Q,Long S Q.2020.Government ability,professional dedication and economic loss:An analysis of the factors behind the changes in government trust in the early period of coronavirus epidemic[J].Journal of Southeast University (Philosophy and Social Science),22(5):112-120.(in Chinese)
• 王娟.2014.影响公众对专家信任的因素——北京公众对建设垃圾焚烧厂的风险感知调研分析[J].自然辩证法通讯，36(5):79-86.Wang J.2014.Factors affecting the public’s trust in experts:Beijing public’s risk perception of building waste incineration plant[J].Journal of Dialectics of Nature,36(5):79-86.(in Chinese)
• 王娟.2016.气候变化治理中公众对专家的信任研究[J].自然辩证法通讯，38(6):90-96.Wang J.2016.Public trust in experts in the climate change governance[J].Journal of Dialectics of Nature,38(6):90-96.(in Chinese)
• 王锡锌，章永乐.2003.专家、大众与知识的运用——行政规则制定过程的一个分析框架[J].中国社会科学，(3):113-127.Wang X X,Zhang Y L.2003.Experts,the public and use of knowledge:An analytical framework for administrative rule making[J].Social Sciences in China,(3):113-127.(in Chinese)
• 魏静，贾宇广，朱恒民，等.2022.基于舆情当事人信息质量及群众信任阈值的观点演化研究[J].情报杂志，41(2):126-133.Wei J,Jia Y G,Zhu H M,et al.2022.Research on the opinion evolution of information quality and mass acceptance threshold under the influence of public opinion parties[J].Journal of Intelligence,41(2):126-133.(in Chinese)
• 韦路，李佳瑞.2022.基于专家系统的政府信任：重大公共卫生事件下的媒介接触如何影响政府信任[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),52(9):69-85.Wei L,Li J R.2022.Government trust through expert systems:How does media exposure affect government trust in a major public health crisis?[J].Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences),52(9):69-85.(in Chinese)
• 文宏，李风山.2020.公共危机情境中的标语口号：传播属性与话语建构[J].新闻与传播评论，73(6):53-60.Wen H,Li F S.2020.Slogans in the context of public crisis:Exploring the communication attributes and discourse construction[J].Journalism & Communication Review,73(6):53-60.(in Chinese)
• 向倩仪，楚亚杰，金兼斌.2015.公众信任格局中的科学家：一项实证研究[J].现代传播，37(6):46-50.Xiang Q Y,Chu Y J,Jin J B.2015.Scientists in the pattern of public trust:An empirical study[J].Modern Communication,37(6):46-50.(in Chinese)
• 徐云鹏，上官莉娜，许艳闰.2023.公共危机信息来源及叙述方式对公众风险感知和防护行为影响——基于突发公共卫生事件的实验研究[J].现代情报，43(4):88-100.Xu Y P,Shangguan L N,Xu Y R.2023.The influence of public crisis information source and narrative methods on public risk perception and protective behavior—An experimental research based on public health emergencies[J].Journal of Modern Information,43(4):88-100.(in Chinese)
• 游淳惠，金兼斌，徐雅兰.2016.公众如何看待科学家参与政策制定：从科学素养、社会网络和信任的角度[J].新闻大学，(6):77-86.You C H,Jin J B,Xu Y L.2016.Public attitudes towards scientistss roles in policy making:An analysis from the perspective of science literacy,social network and trust[J].Journalism Research,(6):77-86.(in Chinese)
• 张书维，冯帅瑶.2024.行为公共管理视角下叙事政策框架研究的微观进路——一个系统性文献综述[J].行政论坛，31(5):50-62.Zhang S W,Feng S Y.2024.Micro-Level research approaches to the narrative policy framework from the perspective of behavioral public administration—A systematic review[J].Administrative Tribune,31(5):50-62.(in Chinese)
• 张学义，郭喨.2022.新冠肺炎疫情中的专家信任及其启示[J].自然辩证法通讯，44(7):94-103.Zhang X Y,Guo L.2022.Public trust in experts during the COVID-19 epidemic[J].Journal of Dialectics of Nature,44(7):94-103.(in Chinese)
• 张扬，秦川申.2022.政策叙事、公众态度与支持行为倾向——基于上海城市数字化转型的调查实验[J].公共行政评论，15(3):140-160.Zhang Y,Qin C S.2022.Policy narratives,public attitude,and supportive behavior intention:A survey experiment of the city digital transformation in Shanghai[J].Journal of Public Administration,15(3):140-160.(in Chinese)
• 赵延东，叶锦涛，何光喜.2021.突发风险事件中公众对科学家的信任及其影响因素研究[J].中国软科学，(7):40-51.Zhao Y D,Ye J T,He G X.2021.Public trust in scientists during risk event and its influencing factors[J].China Soft Science,(7):40-51.(in Chinese)
• Akerlof K,Maibach E W,Fitzgerald D,et al.2013.Do people “personally experience” global warming,and if so how,and does it matter?[J].Global Environmental Change,23(1):81-91.
• Algan Y,Cohen D,Davoine E,et al.2021.Trust in scientists in times of pandemic:Panel evidence from 12 countries[J].Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,118(40):e2108576118.
• Altenmüller M S,Wingen T,Schulte A.2024.Explaining polarized trust in scientists:A political stereotype-approach[J].Science Communication,46(1):92-115.
• Angelou A,Ladi S,Panagiotatou D,Tsagkroni V.2024.Paths to trust:Explaining citizens’ trust to experts and evidence-informed policymaking during the COVID-19 pandemic.Public Administration,102(3):1008-1025.
• Battiston P,Kashyap R,Rotondi V.2021.Reliance on scientists and experts during an epidemic:Evidence from the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy[J].SSM-Population Health,13:100721.
• Belle N,Cantarelli P,Battaglio R P.2021.To consent,or not to consent?The publicness effect on citizens’ willingness to grant access to personal data in the face of a health crisis[J].Journal of European Public Policy,28(5):782-800.
• Bergquist M,Nilsson A,Schultz W P.2019.Experiencing a severe weather event increases concern about climate change[J].Frontiers in Psychology,10:220.
• Carlton J S,Mase A S,Knutson C L,et al.2016.The effects of extreme drought on climate change beliefs,risk perceptions,and adaptation attitudes[J].Climatic Change,135(2):211-226.
• Cologna V,Siegrist M.2020.The role of trust for climate change mitigation and adaptation behaviour:A meta-analysis[J].Journal of Environmental Psychology,69:101428.
• Coombs W T.1998.An analytic framework for crisis situations:Better responses from a better understanding of the situation[J].Journal of Public Relations Research,10(3):177-191.
• Coombs W T.2007.Protecting organization reputations during a crisis:The development and application of situational crisis communication theory[J].Corporate Reputation Review,10(3):163-176.
• Critchley C R.2008.Public opinion and trust in scientists:The role of the research context,and the perceived motivation of stem cell researchers[J].Public Understanding of Science,17(3):309-327.
• Demski C,Capstick S,Pidgeon N,et al.2017.Experience of extreme weather affects climate change mitigation and adaptation responses[J].Climatic Change,140(2):149-164.
• Fage-Butler A,Ledderer L,Nielsen K H.2022.Public trust and mistrust of climate science:A meta-narrative review[J].Public Understanding of Science,31(7):832-846.
• Fleming A,Vanclay F,Hiller C,et al.2014.Challenging dominant discourses of climate change[J].Climatic Change,127(3/4):407-418.
• Guerber A J,Anand V,Ellstrand A E,et al.2020.Extending the situational crisis communication theory:The impact of linguistic style and culture[J].Corporate Reputation Review,23(2):106-127.
• Haney T J.2022.‘Scientists don’t care about truth anymore’:The climate crisis and rejection of science in Canada’s oil country[J].Environmental Sociology,8(1):7-24.
• Herrnstadt E,Muehlegger E.2014.Weather,salience of climate change and congressional voting[J].Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,68(3):435-448.
• Hoogeveen S,Haaf J M,Bulbulia J A,et al.2022.The Einstein effect provides global evidence for scientific source credibility effects and the influence of religiosity[J].Nature Human Behaviour,6(4):523-535.
• Howe P D,Boudet H,Leiserowitz A,et al.2014.Mapping the shadow of experience of extreme weather events[J].Climatic Change,127(2):381-389.
• Joireman J,Barnes Truelove H,Duell B.2010.Effect of outdoor temperature,heat primes and anchoring on belief in global warming[J].Journal of Environmental Psychology,30(4):358-367.
• Jones M D,Mcbeth M K.2010.A narrative policy framework:Clear enough to be wrong?[J].Policy Studies Journal,38(2):329-353.
• Jones M D,Shanahan E A,McBeth M K.2014.The science of stories:Applications of the narrative policy framework in public policy analysis[M].New York:Palgrave,
• Kalatzi Pantera D,B?hmelt T,Bakaki Z.2023.The transnational influence of natural disasters on environmental attitudes[J].European Journal of Political Research,62(3):761-780.
• Levin K,Cashore B,Bernstein S,et al.2012.Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems:Constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change[J].Policy Sciences,45(2):123-152.
• Marques M D,Critchley C R,Walshe J.2015.Attitudes to genetically modified food over time:How trust in organizations and the media cycle predict support[J].Public Understanding of Science,24(5):601-618.
• Mihelj S,Kondor K,?tětka V.2022.Establishing trust in experts during a crisis:Expert trustworthiness and media use during the COVID-19 pandemic[J].Science Communication,44(3):292-319.
• Owen A L,Conover E,Videras J,et al.2012.Heat waves,droughts,and preferences for environmental policy[J].Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,31(3):556-577.
• Reif A,Kneisel T,Sch?fer M,et al.2020.Why are scientific experts perceived as trustworthy?Emotional assessment within TV and YouTube videos[J].Media and Communication,8(1):191-205.
• Rinscheid A,Pianta S,Weber E U.2021.What shapes public support for climate change mitigation policies?The role of descriptive social norms and elite cues[J].Behavioural Public Policy,5(4):503-527.
• Romsdahl R J.2020.Deliberative framing:Opening up discussions for local-level public engagement on climate change[J].Climatic Change,162(2):145-163.
• Safford T G,Whitmore E H,Hamilton L C.2020.Questioning scientific practice:Linking beliefs about scientists,science agencies,and climate change[J].Environmental Sociology,6(2):194-206.
• Sarathchandra D,Haltinner K,Grindal M.2022.Climate skeptics’ identity construction and (Dis) trust in science in the United States[J].Environmental Sociology,8(1):25-40.
• Schr?der T B.2023.Don’t tell me what I don’t want to hear! Politicization and ideological conflict explain why citizens have lower trust in climate scientists and economists than in other natural scientists[J].Political Psychology,44(5):961-981.
• Shao L,Ieong M U.2024.Expert opinion and public support of genetically modified food policy:Does deficit model work in China?[J].Review of Policy Research,41(5):837-853.
• Stokes L C.2016.Electoral backlash against climate policy:A natural experiment on retrospective voting and local resistance to public policy[J].American Journal of Political Science,60(4):958-974.
• Stoutenborough J W,Bromley-Trujillo R,Vedlitz A.2014.Public support for climate change policy:Consistency in the influence of values and attitudes over time and across specific policy alternatives[J].Review of Policy Research,31(6):555-583.
• Suldovsky B,Taylor-Rodríguez D.2021.Epistemic engagement:Examining personal epistemology and engagement preferences with climate change in Oregon[J].Climatic Change,166(3/4):48.
• Thon F M,Jucks R.2017.Believing in expertise:How authors’ credentials and language use influence the credibility of online health information[J].Health Communication,32(7):828-836.
• (1)按照《城镇内涝防治技术规范》(GB 51222—2017)规定,超大城市内涝防治设计的重现期应能抵御100年一遇的暴雨,但北京市内涝防治设计的重现期仅为1年一遇到2年一遇或1年一遇到3年一遇(李修仓等,2023)。
• (2)本研究在文献综述中尊重原文的表达,不严格区分“专家”和“科学家”。
• (3)“7·31北京暴雨”调查情境中的概况和成因均来自真实的官方新闻报道和学术文献,研究者并未对具体内容进行干预。
• (4)出于研究伦理考虑,此处对于中国气象局国家气候中心专家李某某进行匿名处理,实际调查实验中为实名。
• (5)审稿人指出,如果实名专家为“钟南山”院士等知名专家,那么受访者对此可能带有某种明星“滤镜”,从而干扰实验结果。因此,研究者在实验中选择了非知名的专家。
• (6)通过异质性检验进行因果推断的调节效应分析的主要思路如下。(1)提出一个D(叙事角色)影响Y(灾害处置满意度)的理论T,根据这个理论,D通过某个机制(灾害经历)影响Y,并且可以识别出这一机制在某些子总体中存在,在另一些子总体中不存在。令M=1(受灾影响程度大群体)表示存在这一机制,M=0(受灾影响程度小群体)表示不存在这一机制;(2)在M=1组,发现D与Y的相关性继续存在,而在M=0组,D与Y的相关性不复存在;(3)可能导致 D与Y出现相关性的竞争性解释还包括Y影响D的反向因果理论R,或者有混淆因素同时影响D和Y的遗漏变量理论C。如果无法想象理论R或理论C发挥作用的机制在M=1和M=0组存在差异,则理论R或理论C很可能不成立。否则,应该在M=0组也观察到D与Y的相关性。这样就完成了因果关系的强论证。由于本研究采用实验法,反向因果、遗漏变量等情况影响较小,因此主要考虑前两步的检验。
• (7)对具体的稳健性检验结果,感兴趣的读者可联系作者获取。