Science in Society: Re-Evaluating the Deficit Model of Public Attitudes

Abstract

The 'deficit model' of public attitudes towards science has led to controversy over the role of scientific knowledge in explaining lay people's attitudes towards science. The most sustained critique has come from what we refer to as the 'contextualist' perspective. In this view, people's understanding of the ways in which science is embedded within wider political, economic and regulatory settings is fundamental for explaining their attitudes towards science. Most work adopting this perspective has relied on qualitative case studies as empirical evidence. In this paper we challenge the de facto orthodoxy that has connected the deficit model and contextualist perspectives with quantitative and qualitative research methods respectively. We simultaneously test hypotheses from both theoretical approaches using quantitative methodology. We use data from the 1996 British Social Attitudes Survey to investigate the interacting effects of different domains of scientific and contextual knowledge on public attitudes toward science. The results point to the clear importance of knowledge as a determinant of attitudes toward science. However, in contrast to the rather simplistic deficit model that has traditionally characterised discussions of this relationship, this analysis highlights the complex and interacting nature of the knowledge-attitude interface.

‘If they only knew what I know’: Attitude change from education about ‘fracking’

“…Decades of research on the deficit model of communication and understanding have long shown that such simplistic institutional framings are flawed or at least lack necessary nuance (Fischhoff 1995;Sturgis and Allum 2004). The deficit model contends that people perceive something as a problem because they lack knowledge (often scientific) about the issue; thus, providing them with more knowledge will lead them to change their attitudes.…”

An Array of Deficits: Unpacking NIMBY Discourses in Wind Energy Developers' Conceptualizations of Their Local Opponents

“…Early work on public understanding of science viewed the public as essentially deficient in scientific knowledge and requiring scientific education (Irwin and Michael 2003). From this perspective, fears or opposition to scientific or technological innovations could be explained simply in terms of public ignorance of the science and thus could be overcome with sufficient information or education (Sturgis and Allum 2004). This framing of public responses in terms of a deficit of knowledge has been systematically critiqued by ethnographic work, which reveals that ''public uptake (or not) of science is not based on intellectual capability as much as socio-institutional factors having to do with social access, trust and negotiation as opposed to imposed authority'' (Wynne 1991, 116).…”

Mediating Science and Society in the EU and UK: From Information-Transmission to Deliberative Democracy?

“…Thus, despite the overcompensation in some areas of PEST to distinguish engagement models from deficit models, the deficit model nonetheless often resurfaces as a significant element of how contemporary PEST is conceptualized and enacted, as recognized in the more nuanced PEST models mapped more recently (Trench 2008). A sense of unease with the total rejection of the deficit model was echoed repeatedly by a number of STS scholars who, while not rejecting the more participatory and contextual elements of the shift from PUS to PEST, have raised concerns about the need for information in personal and political decision-making processes, the role of expertise and a more complex model of how knowledge is created, distributed and used (Durodie 2003;Sturgis and Allum 2004;Wynne 2006).…”