Literature DB >> 22397083

The cultural authority of science: public trust and acceptance of organized science.

Gordon Gauchat1.   

Abstract

Using the National Science Foundation's 2006 Science Indicators Survey, this study explores three distinct explanations of public attitudes. First, the knowledge-attitudes model refers to a well tested relationship between public knowledge of science and more favorable attitudes toward science. Second, the alienation model hypothesizes that public disassociation with science is a symptom of a general disenchantment with late modernity, mainly, the limitations associated with codified expertise, rational bureaucracy, and institutional authority. A third approach emphasizes the cultural meaning of science: how various public beliefs about "what science is" relate to acceptance or reservations about science. The Science Indicators Survey shows that US adults view science (what it is or should be) in three distinct ways: (1) in terms of having a systematic method, (2) in terms of social location (i.e., takes place in a university or a laboratory), and (3) in terms of knowledge that should accord with commonsense and tradition. The findings in this study indicate that the knowledge-attitudes, alienation, and cultural meanings models are all valuable for understanding the cultural authority of science. However, the strength of these explanations depends on the type of attitude analyzed.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22397083     DOI: 10.1177/0963662510365246

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Underst Sci        ISSN: 0963-6625


  12 in total

1.  Why Frankenstein is a Stigma Among Scientists.

Authors:  Peter Nagy; Ruth Wylie; Joey Eschrich; Ed Finn
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  The Einstein effect provides global evidence for scientific source credibility effects and the influence of religiosity.

Authors:  Suzanne Hoogeveen; Julia M Haaf; Joseph A Bulbulia; Robert M Ross; Ryan McKay; Sacha Altay; Theiss Bendixen; Renatas Berniūnas; Arik Cheshin; Claudio Gentili; Raluca Georgescu; Will M Gervais; Kristin Hagel; Christopher Kavanagh; Neil Levy; Alejandra Neely; Lin Qiu; André Rabelo; Jonathan E Ramsay; Bastiaan T Rutjens; Hugh Turpin; Filip Uzarevic; Robin Wuyts; Dimitris Xygalatas; Michiel van Elk
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2022-02-07

3.  The nature and origins of political polarization over science.

Authors:  Roderik Rekker
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2021-02-17

4.  Deep impact: unintended consequences of journal rank.

Authors:  Björn Brembs; Katherine Button; Marcus Munafò
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Is extinction forever?

Authors:  Brenda D Smith-Patten; Eli S Bridge; Priscilla H C Crawford; Daniel J Hough; Jeffrey F Kelly; Michael A Patten
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2015-02-23

6.  A CRISPR New World: Attitudes in the Public toward Innovations in Human Genetic Modification.

Authors:  Steven M Weisberg; Daniel Badgio; Anjan Chatterjee
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2017-05-22

7.  The credibility of scientific communication sources regarding climate change: A population-based survey experiment.

Authors:  Luis Sanz-Menéndez; Laura Cruz-Castro
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2019-04-17

8.  Understanding the public, the visitors, and the participants in science communication activities.

Authors:  Naoko Kato-Nitta; Tadahiko Maeda; Kensuke Iwahashi; Masashi Tachikawa
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2017-08-04

9.  Socioscientific Issues Thinking and Action in the Midst of Science-in-the-Making.

Authors:  Benjamin C Herman; Michael P Clough; Asha Rao
Journal:  Sci Educ (Dordr)       Date:  2022-01-08       Impact factor: 2.921

10.  French Public Familiarity and Attitudes toward Clinical Research during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Émilien Schultz; Jeremy K Ward; Laëtitia Atlani-Duault; Seth M Holmes; Julien Mancini
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.