Performative credibility: How opioid researchers sustain public trust during the opioid epidemic

Experts often face credibility challenges during times of crisis. However, opioid use disorder (OUD) researchers preserved their scientific credibility despite the increasing public scrutiny of medical knowledge during the opioid epidemic. Building on 30 in-depth interviews with OUD researchers, this article examines how researchers conduct scientific research, collaborate with non-expert stakeholders, and communicate research outcomes to the public. It distinguishes between performative credibility - a discourse enacted through languages, meanings, and symbols in constructing the reality of credibility, and descriptive credibility - the description, perception, and measurements of credibility under a given credibility discourse. It argues that the crisis of expertise is situational - it depends on whether and how performative credibility is sustained. This article finds that OUD researchers enact at least three credibility discourses: professional, data-driven, and community-centered. While researchers can have multiple discourses in mind, their choices of enacting a specific credibility discourse when interacting with non-experts and the public are contingent upon their rankings in the profession, medical training backgrounds, forms of patient interactions, and access to OUD medications. This case recenters sociological studies of expertise and trust on the enacting power of experts' statements and actions. It also reveals the relevance of social locations in understanding the formation of the credibility crisis. Finally, it provides a conceptual framework for understanding public (mis)trust in science and medicine.