Attitudes towards science among Spanish citizens: The case of critical engagers

Abstract

Using data obtained from Spanish surveys on the public perception of science, this article presents a critical review of current practices of population profile segmentation, including the one-dimensional representation of perceived risks and benefits and of the systematic underestimation of critical attitudes to the social impact of science and technology. We use discriminant analysis to detect a somewhat hidden cluster in the Spanish population which we call 'critical engagers'. These individuals are critically and socially responsible and are not reticent about expressing concern regarding scientific-technological change. While they hold an overall positive attitude towards change of this kind, they are at the same time well aware of the risks posed by particular fields of application. We highlight the academic interest and political value of these individuals, attributing to this population a mature and intelligent stance which may well be employed in enhancing the relationship between science and society.

Science communication scholars use more and more segmentation analyses: Can we take them to the next level?

“…Current analyses have employed almost all the most common statistical techniques for clustering data, ranging from distanced-based procedures like hierarchical (Runge et al, 2018) and k-means clustering (Ipsos MORI, 2013) to model-based procedures like latent class (Schäfer et al, 2018) and latent profile analysis (Pullman et al, 2018), sometimes with running a factor analysis in a first step (Kawamoto et al, 2011) and sometimes without (Guenther & Weingart, 2017). Other studies did not employ multivariate statistics at all and applied "manual clustering" by defining which combinations of variable expressions would lead to which kind of segment (Cámara et al, 2018;Nisbet & Markowitz, 2014;Sweeney Research, 2011).…”

Perception of genetically engineered crops in Paraguay

“…One factor to consider in terms of the perception of risks and benefits of GE organisms is the role of objective knowledge about them compared to how much knowledge subjects believe they have about the subject. 29–33 Those who show the most extreme opposition to GE foods are also the least knowledgeable, but their perception of their own knowledge of the subject is also wrong, i.e. they think they know more than they actually do.…”

El compromiso del sector privado con la ciencia: abriendo la caja negra de la percepción de la ciencia en la empresa

“…At first, it was focused exclusively on two possible responses to scientific advances: confidence in its benefits or distrust of its risks. This led to unsuitable measures and a very rough classification of citizens in function of a polarised scheme (Cámara et al, 2017). Recent studies have shown that individuals with a high degree of knowledge and interest in science do not have monolithic attitudes but are able to discriminate the benefits and harms based on the type of specific scientific progress about which the questionnaire is asking (Miller, 2004;Bauer, 2009;Cámara et al, 2017).…”

“…This led to unsuitable measures and a very rough classification of citizens in function of a polarised scheme (Cámara et al, 2017). Recent studies have shown that individuals with a high degree of knowledge and interest in science do not have monolithic attitudes but are able to discriminate the benefits and harms based on the type of specific scientific progress about which the questionnaire is asking (Miller, 2004;Bauer, 2009;Cámara et al, 2017). Likewise, the Science and the Public report (OST and Wellcome Trust, 2001, 329) proposed a new approach, suggesting that 'attitudes toward life influence attitudes toward science'; that is to say, it is not possible to continue analysing this niche of attitudes towards science as a watertight compartment.…”