Industry‐Dominated Science Advisory Boards Are Perceived To Be Legitimate…But Only When They Recommend More Stringent Risk Management Policies
dc.contributor.author | Àrvai, Joseph | |
dc.contributor.author | Gray, Sara Goto | |
dc.contributor.author | Raimi, Kaitlin T. | |
dc.contributor.author | Wilson, Robyn | |
dc.contributor.author | Drummond, Caitlin | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-12-02T14:41:21Z | |
dc.date.available | WITHHELD_12_MONTHS | |
dc.date.available | 2020-12-02T14:41:21Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2020-11 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Àrvai, Joseph ; Gray, Sara Goto; Raimi, Kaitlin T.; Wilson, Robyn; Drummond, Caitlin (2020). "Industry‐Dominated Science Advisory Boards Are Perceived To Be Legitimate…But Only When They Recommend More Stringent Risk Management Policies." Risk Analysis 40(11): 2329-2339. | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0272-4332 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1539-6924 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/163630 | |
dc.description.abstract | In 2017, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was criticized for two controversial directives that restricted the eligibility of academic scientists to serve on the agency’s key science advisory boards (SABs). The EPA portrayed these directives as necessary to ensure the integrity of the SAB. Critics portrayed them as a tactic by the agency to advance a more industry‐friendly deregulatory agenda. With this backdrop, this research examined board composition and its effect on the perceived legitimacy of risk management recommendations by the SAB. In an experiment, we presented participants with hypothetical EPA SABs composed of different proportions of academic and industry scientists. We then asked participants to rate their satisfaction with, and the legitimacy of, these boards in light of their decisions in scenarios based on actual EPA SAB deliberations. Participants perceived higher levels of satisfaction and legitimacy when SABs made more stringent risk management recommendations. While SABs dominated by industry scientists were perceived to be more strongly motivated to protect business interests, we found no effect of board composition on perceptions of satisfaction and legitimacy. These results are consistent with prior research on decision quality that suggests people use normative outcomes as a heuristic for assessing the quality of deliberations. Moreover, these results suggest that members of the public are supportive of federal SABs regardless of their composition, but only if they take actions that are consistent with normative expectations. | |
dc.publisher | Sage | |
dc.publisher | Wiley Periodicals, Inc. | |
dc.subject.other | procedural justice | |
dc.subject.other | legitimacy | |
dc.subject.other | risk management | |
dc.subject.other | EPA | |
dc.subject.other | Decision making | |
dc.title | Industry‐Dominated Science Advisory Boards Are Perceived To Be Legitimate…But Only When They Recommend More Stringent Risk Management Policies | |
dc.type | Article | |
dc.rights.robots | IndexNoFollow | |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Business (General) | |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Business and Economics | |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163630/2/risa13540.pdf | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163630/1/risa13540_am.pdf | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1111/risa.13540 | |
dc.identifier.source | Risk Analysis | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Skitka, L. J., & Houston, D. A. ( 2001 ). When due process is of no consequence: Moral mandates and presumed defendant guilt or innocence. Social Justice Research, 14, 305 – 326. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Campbell‐Arvai, V., Bessette, D., Wilson, R., & Arvai, J. ( 2018 ). Decision‐making about the environment. In T. Mardsen (Ed.), The sage handbook of nature (pp. 487 – 511 ). London, UK: Sage. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Colquitt, J. A. ( 2001 ). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386 – 400. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Cornwall, W. ( 2017 ). Trump’s EPA has blocked agency grantees from serving on science advisory panels. Here is what it means. Science. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | 95th Congress of the United States of America. ( 1978 ). Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act. House Resolution 11302; Public Law 95‐477, Washington, DC. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.‐G. ( 2009 ). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149 – 1160. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | General Services Administration. ( 2019 ). FACA Database. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Gregory, R., Failing, L., Harstone, M., Long, G., McDaniels, T., & Ohlson, D. ( 2012 ). Structured decision making: A practical guide to environmental management choices. Chichester, UK: Wiley‐Blackwell. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. ( 1993 ). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lind, E., & Tyler, T. ( 1988 ). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, NY: Plenum Press. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lipshitz, R., & Barak, D. ( 1995 ). Hindsight wisdom: Outcome knowledge and the evaluation of decisions. Acta Psychologia, 88, 105 – 125. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Malakoff, D. ( 2017 ). A battle over the ‘best science’. Science, 355, 1108. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | McComas, K., Tuite, L. S., Waks, L., & Sherman, L. A. ( 2007 ). Predicting satisfaction and outcome acceptance with advisory committee meetings: The role of procedural justice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 905 – 927. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Nisbet, M. C. ( 2011 ). Climate shift: Clear vision for the next decade of public debate. Washington, DC: American University, School of Communication. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Pew Research Center. ( 2019 ). Public’s 2019 Priorities: Economy, Health Care, Education and security all near top of list. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Phillips, J. M. ( 2002 ). Antecedents and consequences of procedural justice perceptions in hierarchical decision‐making teams. Small Group Research, 33, 32 – 64. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Stuessy, M. M. ( 2016 ). Federal advisory committees: An introduction and overview. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. ( 1975 ). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Thorndike, E. L. A. ( 1920 ). Constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 25 – 29. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Tonko, P. D. ( 2017 ). Time to codify scientific integrity. Science, 356, 1241 – 1242. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Tyler, T. R. ( 2000 ). Social justice: Outcome and procedure. International Journal of Psychology, 35, 117 – 125. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Union of Concerned Scientists. ( 2018 ). Abandoning science advice: One year in, the Trump administration is sidelining science advisory committees. Cambridge, MA: Center for Science and Democracy. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | van den Bos, K., & Miedema, J. ( 2000 ). Toward understanding why fairness matters: The influence of mortality salience on reactions to procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 355 – 366. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. M. ( 1997 ). (Procedural and distributive justice: What is fair depends more on what comes first than on what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 95 – 104. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wagner, W., Fisher, E., & Pascual, P. ( 2018 ). Whose science? A new era in regulatory “science wars”. Science, 362, 636. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Arvai, J. L. ( 2003 ). Using risk communication to disclose the outcome of a participatory decision making process: Effects on the perceived acceptability of risk‐policy decisions. Risk Analysis, 23, 281 – 289. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Arvai, J. L., & Froschauer, A. ( 2010 ). Good decisions, bad decisions: The interaction of process and outcome in evaluations of decision quality. Journal of Risk Research, 13, 845 – 859. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Arvai, J. L., Gregory, R., & McDaniels, T. ( 2001 ). Testing a structured decision approach: Value‐focused thinking for deliberative risk communication. Risk Analysis, 21, 1065 – 1076. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Baron, J., & Hershey, J. C. ( 1988 ). Outcome bias in decision evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 569 – 579. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Besley, J. C., McCright, A. M., Zahry, N. R., Elliott, K. C., Kaminski, N. E., & Martin, J. D. ( 2017 ). Perceived conflict of interest in health science partnerships. PLoS One, 12, e0175643. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Boyle, K., & Kotchen, M. ( 2018 ). Retreat on economics at the EPA. Science, 361, 729. | |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.