Identifying Relevant Anti-Science Perceptions to Improve Science-Based Communication: The Negative Perceptions of Science Scale

Abstract

Science communicators and scholars have struggled to understand what appears to be increasingly frequent endorsement of a wide range of anti-science beliefs and a corresponding reduction of trust in science. A common explanation for this issue is a lack of science literacy/knowledge among the general public (Funk et al. 2015). However, other possible explanations have been advanced, including conflict with alternative belief systems and other contextual factors, and even cultural factors (Gauchat 2008; Kahan 2015) that are not necessarily due to knowledge deficits. One of the challenges is that there are limited tools available to measure a range of possible underlying negative perceptions of science that could provide a more nuanced framework within which to improve communication around important scientific topics. This project describes two studies detailing the development and validation of the Negative Perceptions of Science Scale (NPSS), a multi-dimensional instrument that taps into several distinct sets of negative science perceptions: Science as Corrupt, Science as Complex, Science as Heretical, and Science as Limited. Evidence for the reliability and validity of the NPSS is described. The sub-dimensions of the NPSS are associated with a range of specific anti-science beliefs across a broad set of topic areas above and beyond that explained by demographics (including education, sex, age, and income), political, and religious ideology. Implications for these findings for improving science communication and science-related message tailoring are discussed.

Modeling compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines: The critical role of trust in science

“…Lewandowsky, Gignac, & Oberauer, 2013;Rutjens & van der Lee, 2020) and, to some extent, education (e.g. Morgan, Collins, Sparks, & Welch, 2018). While more general and stable personality traits are less present in the previous literature on predictors of trust in science, we believe that aspects of open-mindedness in particular (i.e.…”

Modeling compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines: the critical role of trust in science

“…Lewandowsky et al, 2013;Rutjens & van der Lee, 2020) and, to some extent, education level (e.g. Morgan et al, 2018). While more general and stable personality traits are less present in the previous literature on predictors of trust in science, we believe that aspects of open-mindedness, especially intellectual curiosity (i.e.…”

Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science

“…individual climate researchers or science in general; see Sarathchandra and Haltinner, 2020), may have different rationales (e.g. ideological agendas or vested interests; see Morgan et al., 2018), and may come in different intensities (e.g. rejection of science per se or resentment toward scientific institutions but acceptance of scientific methods; see Achterberg et al., 2017).…”