Public Understanding of Science最新文献

A latent class analysis on a nationally representative Australian sample (N = 1000) identified four subgroups (i.e. classes), ranging from high to low concern about, and willingness to donate to, a national genomic repository under different forms of public and commercial management and access. The distribution of concerns and governance preferences across these classes was investigated. This added to previous research by indicating the degree to which extant concerns (e.g. corporate profiteering, discrimination by insurers) are held by different segments of the community. Based on the governance mechanisms that had widespread support across segments, the following recommendations are made to develop a trusted Australian genomic repository: the repository cannot be solely profit-driven; can utilise an access committee; protections (e.g. ensuring confidentiality of donors) may not require new legislation; data users cannot retain data for future research; the public should remain informed about the intended and/or actual benefits of research.

This study assesses whether the Democratic Party holds issue ownership over science in the United States. We analyze data from a national survey that asked 1041 adults questions specifically designed to measure perceptions of science ownership. While the results suggest that the Democratic Party does hold a significant advantage in ownership of science in an abstract sense, perceptions of ownership of specific types of science vary across the two parties. Those who identify as Independents drive much of the aggregate perceptions of ownership of science, whereas partisans' perceptions of issue ownership of science are mostly driven by in-party favoritism. Post hoc analyses suggest that news media use contributes to perceptions of science ownership and reinforces affinity-party preference.

Wikipedia's influence in shaping public perceptions of science underscores the significance of scientists being recognized on the platform, as it can impact their careers. Although Wikipedia offers guidelines for determining when a scientist qualifies for their own article, it currently lacks guidance regarding whether a scientist should be acknowledged in articles related to the innovation processes to which they have contributed. To explore how Wikipedia addresses this issue of scientific "micro-notability," we introduce a digital method called Name Edit Analysis, enabling us to quantitatively and qualitatively trace mentions of scientists within Wikipedia's articles. We study two CRISPR-related Wikipedia articles and find dynamic negotiations of micro-notability as well as a surprising tension between Wikipedia's principle of safeguarding against self-promotion and the scholarly norm of "due credit." To reconcile this tension, we propose that Wikipedians and scientists collaborate to establish specific micro-notability guidelines that acknowledge scientific contributions while preventing excessive self-promotion.

The public acceptance of evolution remains a contentious issue in the United States. Numerous investigations have used national cross-sectional studies to examine the factors associated with the acceptance or rejection of evolution. This analysis uses a 33-year longitudinal study that followed the same 5000 public-school students from grade 7 through midlife (ages 45-48) and is the first to do so in regard to evolution. A set of structural equation models demonstrate the complexity and changing nature of influences over these three decades. Parents and local influences are strong during the high school years. The combination of post-secondary education and occupational and family choices demonstrate that the 15 years after high school are the switchyards of life.

A recent wave of studies has diversified science communication by emphasizing gender, race, and disability. In this article, we focus on the understudied lens of religion. Based on an analysis of ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) science journalism and its readership, we identify four main strategies for tailoring science, which we call the four "R"s-removing, reclaiming, remodeling, and rubricating science. By analyzing how science communication is produced by and for a particular religious group, we reveal the diverse ways a religious-sensitive science communication is shaped by community gatekeepers, while also exploring the ethical and epistemological tensions this tailoring entails.

A goal of many science communicators is to foster trust in scientists and their work. This study investigates if existing textual resources that scientists create in the course of their regular activities can be improved to enhance perceptions of scientists as trustworthy. Building on Mayer et al.'s integrative model of organizational trust, we examine how communicating benevolence through short biographies can affect trustworthiness perceptions using a 3 (degree of benevolence information: high, unspecified, low) × 3 (research area: crop genetics, corn and soy genetics, biotechnology use) survey design. We find that the degree of benevolence information significantly influences perceptions of benevolence and integrity, as well as willingness to trust, with these effects being consistent across different research areas. However, the degree of benevolence communicated had no significant effect on the perceived competence of the scientists. These findings underscore the importance of highlighting benevolence in communication to positively influence trustworthiness perceptions, thus offering insights for science communication practices.

Gene drive could be a powerful tool for addressing problems of conservation, agriculture, and human health caused by insect and animal pests but is likely to be controversial as it involves the release of genetically modified organisms. This study examined the social determinants of opinion of gene drive. We asked a representative sample of the U.S. public to respond to a description of a hypothetical application of a gene-drive mosquito to the problem of malaria and examined the relationship of these responses with demographic and ideological beliefs. We found strong general approval for the use of gene-drive mosquitos to address malaria, coinciding with the concern about a possible environmental impact of modified mosquitos and that gene drives represent "too much power over nature." Among the determinants we measured, respondent acceptance of scientism and trust that scientists are advancing the public's interest were the greatest predictors of views of gene drive.

Research on scientist perceptions tends to focus on either stereotypes (white, male) or social evaluations (competent but cold), sometimes yielding incongruent conclusions (e.g. scientists are simultaneously seen as moral and immoral). Across two preregistered correlational studies (N = 1091), we address this issue by simultaneously assessing stereotypes and social evaluations and their association with two key outcomes: trust in scientists and science career appeal. We find that stereotypes and social evaluations are distinct types of perceptions-they correlate slightly, stem from different worldviews, and predict partially different outcomes. While western enculturation and religiosity predict stereotypes, right-wing political ideology negatively relates to social evaluations. Stereotypes are associated with lower science career appeal among stereotype-incongruent individuals, while social evaluations predict more trust in scientists and higher science career appeal. This work thus sheds light on the psychological pathways to trust in scientists, as well as on the perceived appeal of becoming a scientist.