When discussions become emotional

In these times, when Donald Trump and Greta Thunberg are active, discussions on scientific findings can become emotional. But how does the general public see such emotional debates' Initial answers to this question have now been found in the interdisciplinary DFG (German Research Foundation) Research Training Group "Trust and Communication in a Digitized World". In two studies, Prof. Regina Jucks and I together examined the effects that aggression on the one hand, and enthusiasm on the other, have in science communication. The result: both styles of language can damage the trustworthiness of science communication and the credibility of its arguments. Why are these findings especially relevant for scientists today? When scientists report the latest findings from their research, this does not mean that their conclusions are automatically believed. Rather, discussions of these results then begin within the scientific community. Did the researchers select appropriate methods in their search for answers to the underlying questions' Did they evaluate the research data in a statistically correct manner? Can the results be interpreted differently? This debate is important because it serves as a quality control mechanism within the scientific community. As a result, it is hardly surprising that such debates are held at scientific conferences and in the pages of scientific journals. However, when scientific findings are relevant for a large number of people, these debates increasingly take place in public and they often centre on results that promise answers to specific, personal questions. Can I increase my life expectancy by drinking a glass of red wine every evening?