Building trust in science requires more than better messaging, argue experts
Michelle Groman and Caroline Montojo contend that restoring public trust in science cannot be achieved through communication alone. They emphasize the need for relational infrastructure and genuine engagement to rebuild credibility.
The commentary by Michelle Groman and Caroline Montojo shifts the conversation around scientific credibility away from conventional public relations tactics. Their argument suggests that repeated messaging efforts, however polished, fail to address the underlying disconnect between institutions and the communities they serve. Instead, they point toward what they term "relational infrastructure"—the sustained structures and practices that allow for meaningful interaction between scientists and the public.
This perspective reflects a broader recognition within public health that credibility is built through demonstrated accountability rather than declarative statements. Genuine engagement implies listening as much as informing, creating spaces where concerns are acknowledged and addressed. The authors position trust as an outcome of ongoing relationships, not a product of clever communication campaigns.
This argument could influence how public health agencies allocate resources, potentially shifting funding from media outreach toward community partnership programs. If adopted, such approaches may reshape institutional priorities, affecting researchers, local organizations, and everyday citizens who interact with health guidance. The impact could be gradual, as relational work requires time and sustained commitment. Communities historically skeptical of scientific institutions may feel more included in decision-making processes, though measurable outcomes would depend on consistent implementation across diverse settings.