Filter by keyword: Public perception of science and technology

This article examines climate change discourse on Brazilian social media from 2014 to 2022 and use a longitudinal approach, analyzing discourse, scientific authority, and eco-emotions on Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter. Methods include TF-IDF for feature extraction, sentiment analysis with VADER, and Named Entity Recognition (NER). A Ridge Classifier was trained on 557 manually classified samples. Findings show no significant increase in challenges to scientific authority or skepticism, but reveal a subtle shift towards using uncertainty as a rhetorical tool to undermine trust in scientific discourse.

A potential decline in public trust in science has often been linked to digital media environments, which serve as intermediaries of trust by providing cues for why (not) to trust science. This study examines whether exposure to trust cues in content affects public trust in science (across population groups). The study employs a mixed-method design, combining content analysis (“n” = 906) and panel survey data (“n” = 1,030) in Germany. The findings reveal that exposure to trust cues in certain media predicts public trust in science. Variations across trust groups indicate a nuanced nature of trust-assessing processes in digital media environments.

In light of global crises such as COVID-19, we argue that people’s trust in science drives their media choices in the digital sphere. The results from a German online survey show that individuals who perceive scientists as trustworthy in terms of ability, benevolence, and integrity, confidently expect science to provide accurate knowledge and guide reasonable decision-making in times of crisis. In turn, these positive trusting expectations towards science increase the use of established journalistic and scientific online sources for accessing scientific information. In contrast, people with low or no trust in science tend to resort to the messenger Telegram and ‘alternative’ online media outlets. Interestingly, the individual need for orientation does not amplify this association between trust in science and digital media use in a crisis situation.

Generative AI like ChatGPT has been diagnosed to fundamentally impact different realms of life. This includes science communication, where GenAI tools are becoming important sources of science-related content for many people. This raises the question of whether people trust GenAI as a source in this field, a question that has not been answered sufficiently yet. Adapting a model developed by Roberts et al. [2013] and utilizing survey data from the German Science Barometer 2023, we find that Germans are rather sceptical about and do not strongly trust GenAI in science communication. Structural equation modelling shows that respondents' trust in GenAI as a source in science communication is driven strongly by their general trust in science, which is largely driven by their knowledge about science and the perception that science improves quality of life.

This study investigates public perceptions of trustworthiness and authenticity regarding scientists engaged in controversial and less controversial fields with a cross-sectional survey of a German sample (“N” = 1007). Results indicate that scientists in controversial fields like COVID-19 or climate change are perceived as less trustworthy and authentic compared to scientists in less controversial fields or scientists without specification of their field. Additionally, we found that science-related media consumption shaped people´s trustworthiness and authenticity perceptions towards scientists. Our analysis points out how public perceptions of scientists vary if these scientists research controversial areas, actively participating in public (and media) life.

As the late teen and early adulthood years have been identified as a period in life where opinions regarding politics are formed, it is important to understand how the highly politicized science issue — the COVID-19 pandemic — may have influenced young adults’ trust in science and how they come to know the accuracy of science information. In order to explore these topics, this study employed a series of focus groups with college students (N = 22). Findings show that while focus group participants were largely trusting of science and science institutions, they were wary of government and politician interference in science and scientists who lack the integrity and benevolence to act in the best interests of the public.

Scientists are increasingly affected by harassment, especially on social media. While initial research highlights the detrimental consequences for affected scientists, the increased visibility of harassment through social media might also negatively affect public perceptions of scientists. Using a preregistered 2x2 between-subjects experiment (N = 1,246), this study shows that exposure to uncivil comments harassing female or male scientists negatively affects citizens’ trust in the attacked scientists but not trust in scientists in general or scientific information. Furthermore, some of the effects are moderated by gender and science-related populist attitudes.

Is how science is conducted legitimate? Are scientists trustworthy? Whether the public answers “yes” to these questions is critical for science communicators. We explore how social factors affect public perceptions of the practice of science, and then test how those beliefs relate to views about how scientists engage with the public and policy making. Our results show that political ideology and religiosity affect these views. However, more importantly, respondents' concerns about the integrity of the scientific process are the strongest predictor of views about scientists' behavior, providing a focus area for future communication efforts in support of science-based decision making.

In this study, we explored science understanding and attitudes in Japan compared to the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US), examining trust in science versus humanities. Our web-based survey revealed that Japan's research literacy matches its Western counterparts. However, there were notable differences in scientific knowledge depth and public trust in research. Interestingly, higher scientific knowledge correlated with increased trust in research outcomes, a trend not seen in the humanities. In Japan, political ideologies did not significantly influence trust in science or humanities and showed little correlation with scientific knowledge or research literacy. This contrasts with the UK and the US, where political ideology impacts public trust in these fields.

Former government intelligence officer David Grusch became a hot new topic in the UFO world when he declared that the government was hiding an alien ship crash retrieval program. Can this media coverage be influential in increasing belief in UFOs? And can a credible critic of Grusch's claims successfully negate the impact of the media coverage on the acceptance of misinformation? A three-condition experiment (N=287) showed that a counternarrative can successfully negate the influence of his claims on conspiratorial beliefs. We suggest that these results have practical implications for journalists in their coverage of controversial claims.