dw.com
Global Survey Shows High Trust in Science Despite Pandemic
A global survey of almost 72,000 people across 68 countries reveals high trust in science, despite the COVID-19 pandemic; trust is linked to demographics and political views, raising concerns about science's role in policy.
- What are the key findings of this global survey regarding public trust in science and its implications for science's role in society and politics?
- A global survey of nearly 72,000 individuals across 68 countries reveals no widespread crisis of trust in science. Despite stringent pandemic measures, public faith in science remains largely intact, contrary to some predictions. This study, the largest of its kind since the pandemic, highlights a significant desire among many respondents for greater scientific involvement in society and politics.
- How do demographic factors, political ideologies, and social values correlate with levels of trust in scientists, and what are the implications of these correlations?
- The study reveals that trust in scientists is positively correlated with factors such as female gender, older age, higher education, higher income, and urban residence. Liberal political orientations and religiosity also show positive correlations, while social dominance orientation (SDO), characterized by a desire for stronger groups to control weaker ones, negatively correlates with trust in science.
- What are the potential risks and challenges associated with the observed desire for increased scientific involvement in political decision-making, and how can these be mitigated?
- The findings challenge the common narrative of declining trust in science, particularly post-pandemic. However, the desire for greater scientific involvement in policy raises concerns about potential political manipulation of science, as seen during the COVID-19 pandemic where governments often shifted responsibility for unpopular decisions onto 'science'. The study underscores the delicate balance between evidence-based policy and preserving individual liberties.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article is framed to highlight the survey's finding that there is no widespread crisis of trust in science. The headline (if it existed) would likely emphasize this result. The introduction focuses on the positive finding, then subsequently discusses potential dissenting viewpoints and challenges to this conclusion, but primarily to downplay them. This framing prioritizes the positive outcome of the survey and minimizes the complexities of the issue.
Language Bias
While generally neutral, the article uses loaded language in describing the political viewpoints of those who distrust science. Terms like "nationalist right-wing circles" and describing certain scientific fields as "woke" carry negative connotations and could influence reader perception. More neutral terms such as "nationalist conservatives" and instead of "woke" perhaps "those concerned with social justice" might be used. The description of the SDO as a desire for stronger groups to control weaker ones also presents a biased interpretation of this complex social science concept.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the results of the survey and expert opinions, but omits discussion of potential biases within the survey methodology itself. It does not detail the sampling techniques, response rates, or potential demographic limitations that could influence the results. Furthermore, while mentioning political and religious affiliations influencing trust in science, the article lacks specifics on the types of religious beliefs or political ideologies examined and how they correlate with trust levels. Finally, counter-arguments or dissenting views on the survey's findings are absent. While space constraints may explain some omissions, lack of methodological detail weakens the article's credibility.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat false dichotomy by framing the debate as a simple opposition between those who trust science and those who do not. The reality is more nuanced, with varying levels of trust and different reasons behind those levels. The piece simplifies the complex relationship between science, politics, and public opinion by focusing on a broad 'trust' metric, while ignoring the complexities of belief systems and varied interpretations of scientific findings.
Gender Bias
The article mentions that women show greater trust in scientists than men, but this observation is not analyzed further. There is no examination of how gender might affect the interpretation and application of scientific findings, nor are there discussions of gender representation within the scientific community itself or within the survey's sampling methodology. Therefore, while it notes a gender difference, it lacks a deeper analysis of gender bias.
Sustainable Development Goals
The study highlights a high level of trust in scientists and scientific methods, suggesting a positive impact on the quality of information available for education and informed decision-making. The desire for greater scientific involvement in policy also suggests a potential for evidence-based policymaking to improve educational outcomes.