Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication

Abstract

The ability to make evidence-based decisions, and hence to reason on questions concerning scientific and societal aspects, is a crucial goal in science education and science communication. However, science denial poses a constant challenge for society and education. Controversial science issues (CSI) encompass scientific knowledge rejected by the public as well as socioscientific issues, i.e., societal issues grounded in science that are frequently applied to science education. Generating evidence-based justifications for claims is central in scientific and informal reasoning. This study aims to describe attitudes and their justifications within the argumentations of a random online sample (N = 398) when reasoning informally on selected CSI. Following a deductive-inductive approach and qualitative content analysis of written open-ended answers, we identified five types of justifications based on a fine-grained category system. The results suggest a topic-specificity of justifications referring to specific scientific data, while justifications appealing to authorities tend to be common across topics. Subjective, and therefore normative, justifications were slightly related to conspiracy ideation and a general rejection of the scientific consensus. The category system could be applied to other CSI topics to help clarify the relation between scientific and informal reasoning in science education and communication.

Analysis of Data-Based Scientific Reasoning from a Product-Based and a Process-Based Perspective

“…Furthermore, a lot of research on the nature of science has been done, a construct that includes many aspects of epistemic knowledge and is related to scientific reasoning skills [54]. However, data-based scientific reasoning might be essential for most scientific reasoning styles, and it is important for all people to engage in data-based argumentation and decision making in the context of socio-scientific and controversial science issues [55].…”

Science Denial

“…We avoid such a classification further because, at an individual level – where the term denialist would be applied – denial may be based on true skepticism (Clarke, 2017; Jylhä, 2016): as discussed later in this paper, laypeople may sincerely believe that science is not settled. Nonetheless, science denial can also have anti-scientific grounds, motivated either by the dismissal of the scientific method (e.g., due to subjective beliefs, such as religion) or by some instrumental goals (e.g., to show political support) that make the objective reality irrelevant (e.g., Beniermann et al, 2021; Van Bavel & Pereira, 2018).…”

Inoculating students against science-based manipulation strategies in social media: debunking the concept of ‘water with conductivity extract’

“…Even though science-based information may initially seem generally less controversial than social or political information, there are multifaceted, complex and also controversial issues there as well, and our versions of the tasks are focused on such controversial science issues (e.g. climate change, pesticide use) (see Beniermann et al, 2021). The exact changes made to the tasks are outlined in Table 2.…”