Information Map Trust in Science Debate about trust in science is based on unproven assumptions Debate on trust in science often presume a declining level of trust. The debate is rarely substantiated with objective quantitative long-term data.
1
Science visibly improves the quality of life Quality of life is continuously improving – in part thanks to technological advances. Science has a proven track record – it often provides solutions to problems. Science impresses people: ‘Isn’t it amazing what they can do these days!'
Current Level
The level of trust is high for both scientific progress as well as for statements made by scientists Most people expect scientific progress to make life healthier, easier and more comfortable. Scientific information is seen as more reliable than most other sources of information. Younger generations have more trust in science than older generations. The level of trust in science increases with the level of education people have enjoyed.
High trust
Science is self-correcting Scientific processes are transparant and follow clearly defined rules. Science unmasks claims that are not based on sound scientific methods.
General trust in science remains high, while specific issues show a declining level of trust
2
Despite a slight decline in recent years, the general level of trust in science remains high. On certain issues, for example climate change, the level of trust is considerably lower (sometimes temporarily). Trust in the outcomes of scientific research decreases if it is commercially funded.
People willingly place their trust in science
Explanations
Trust makes it easier for people to function in society. The quantitative basis of scientific information instils a sense of security. Our culture values knowledge and progress.
Society continues to invest in science Despite lower government budgets, total investments in research remain at a constant level.
Trust is declining in general People increasingly justify their behaviour and opinions with scientific research
High trust
People wait for scientific solutions to solve (their) problems, instead of taking action themselves. Scientific (economic) models dominate public debate. Society is becoming more scientific, issues are increasingly framed in scientific terms.
People are increasingly critical and less inclined to believe others. Trust between the establishment and the people is declining – scientists are part of the establishment. People are suspicious of scientific research that does not support their point of view.
What is the current level of trust in science, what explains this and what are the consequences?
The monitoring of specific scientific disciplines is diminishing Highly specialized fields of science, such as quantum mechanics, are being monitored less and less.
Science is often difficult to comprehend Debate helps science progress, but it can lead to confusion within the general public. People have limited understanding of statistical and scientific methods and can not judge outcomes properly. Scientific issues are becoming increasingly complex and results are shrouded in ifs and buts. Scientific solutions, e.g. gene technology, are highly controversial for some people.
Scientists' communication confuses people The public value of science is diminishing Policies and their implemention can be delayed due to controversy about their scientific foundation. Science is becoming less useful as an objective standard to settle differences of opinion. People are less inclined to participate in scientific research, for example as test subjects.
3
Consequences
Funding of science is changing Public funding of scientific research is being challenged. Funds are increasingly reallocated to research that generates guaranteed and/or practically useful results.
The scientific community is responding to the declining level of trust The scientific community is improving its methods, sharing information and cooperating internationally. Assessment criteria for science, like visitations and peer reviews, are under discussion. Scientists intend to increase trust by involving the public in scientific research. Regulations concerning integrity are becoming more stringent and may result in increased bureaucracy. Scientists are improving their communication skills, for example by incorporating it in academic education.
Declining trust
Declining trust
Scientists sometimes make claims of a breakthrough, that later turns out to be unfounded. Scientists sometimes make statements (at the request of others) on developments outside their field of expertise. Scientists sometimes react defensively to criticism and only reluctantly admit their mistakes. Scientists do not make the uncertainties and underlying assumptions of their research explicit enough.
Information about science undermines public confidence Amid the general information overload it is hard to value the relevance of scientific information. Scientific uncertainties and excesses often get a lot of attention in the (digital) media. Equal media attention for both sides in scientific debates suggests controversy, even when broad consensus exists. Government, politicians and companies selectively quote from scientific research when it supports their cause. The abiltity of the media to monitor science is decreasing due to a lack of science journalists.
The scientific community is becoming less independent Scientific independence is being jeopardized by increasing dependence on private funding. Scientists are increasingly undertaking secondary activities, but do not always publicly disclose these. The scientific process does not completely exclude bias, for example due to groupthink.
This Information Map provides insight to explanations and consequences of the current level of trust in science within The Netherlands (mid 2010). The current level of trust is based on literature. Explanations and consequences are hypothetical and were determined in three meetings with experts, board members and employees of ‘Adviesraad voor het Wetenschaps- en Technologiebeleid’ (AWT: Advisory Council for Science and Technology Policy). We would like to thank everyone for contributing. This map can be used by the AWT as a starting point for further research and/or a formal advice. On behalf of:
Produced by:
© 2011