A recent study by social psychologists at the University of Amsterdam reveals that conservative Americans exhibit a widespread distrust in science, extending beyond politically charged fields like climate science to areas that drive economic growth.
A new study has revealed that conservative Americans exhibit a wider distrust in science than previously understood, affecting even areas traditionally aligned with conservative economic values. The research, conducted by social psychologists at the University of Amsterdam and published in the journal Nature Human Behaviour, underscores the persistent and broad nature of this distrust, which spans multiple scientific fields.
The study aimed to explore the nuances of trust in science among American conservatives and liberals, particularly amidst growing skepticism towards scientific findings.
“In America, but also in other countries, conservatives generally have lower trust in science. Since the 1980s, trust of science among conservatives in America has even been plummeting,” Bastiaan Rutjens, one of the researchers involved, said in a news release.
The research team surveyed 7,800 Americans, querying their trust levels across 35 scientific professions, from anthropologists to atomic physicists.
Conservatives were found to have less trust than liberals in all fields surveyed, not only in politically charged areas such as climate science and social science but also in disciplines driving economic productivity, like industrial chemistry.
This could be because “scientific findings do not align with conservatives’ political or economic beliefs,” according to the researchers.
“But science is also increasingly dismissed in some circles as a ‘leftist hobby,’ and universities as strongholds of the leftist establishment,” Rutjens added.
The researchers also tested five interventions aimed at boosting trust in scientists among conservatives, addressing perceived moral misalignments and showcasing conservative scientists. However, these efforts were largely ineffective.
“This suggests that their distrust is deeply-rooted and not easily changed,” added Rutjens.
The study’s implications are significant, as it highlights a deep-seated skepticism that poses challenges for science communication and policy-making. While trust varied among the scientific disciplines, the trend persisted across the board, with a particularly large trust gap in climate science, medical research and social science.
“This is likely because findings in these fields often conflict with conservative beliefs, such as a free-market economy or conservative social policies,” Rutjens added.
Even fields like industrial chemistry, closely associated with economic growth, saw lower trust levels from conservatives.
“Their distrust extends across science as a whole,” Rutjens added, emphasizing the pervasive nature of the issue.
The failure of short interventions to shift attitudes suggests that more profound, long-term strategies are needed to mend this trust divide.
“We need stronger interventions that make science truly personal. What can science contribute to your life, here and now?” Rutjens concluded.
The findings of this research, led by Vukašin Gligorić, a doctoral student at the University of Amsterdam at the time who is joining NYU Abu Dhabi as a postdoctoral researcher in the spring, emphasize the complexity of ideological influences on trust in science and the necessity for sustained, tailored approaches to bridge this trust gap.
Source: University of Amsterdam