• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
The climate news that makes a difference.
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
  FEATURED
Renewables ‘Set to Soar’ with 440 GW of New Installations in 2023: IEA June 4, 2023
Greek Industrial Giant Announces 1.4-GW Alberta Solar Farm, Canada’s Biggest June 4, 2023
Shift to Remote Work Cuts Commutes, Frees Downtown Space for Affordable Housing June 4, 2023
2.7M Hectares Lost, Nova Scotia at Ground Zero in ‘Unprecedented’ Early Wildfire Season June 4, 2023
Is Equinor’s Bay du Nord ‘Delay’ a Cancellation in Slow Motion? June 1, 2023
Next
Prev

Understand Why People Reject Science to Boost Acceptance, Academics Urge

August 7, 2022
Reading time: 5 minutes
Full Story: The Conversation @ConversationCA
Primary Author: Aviva Philipp-Muller, Richard Petty, Spike W. S. Lee

EPFL-MEDIACOM/wikimedia commons

EPFL-MEDIACOM/wikimedia commons

1
SHARES
 

Rejection of science is a huge problem, with many people refusing to get vaccines and denying the existence of climate change. Researchers Aviva Philipp-Muller of Simon Fraser University, Richard Petty of Ohio State University, and Spike W.S. Lee of the University of Toronto have come up with four key reasons people reject scientific information.

Those factors, laid out in a post last month for The Conversation, are:

  • Concise headlines. Original content. Timely news and views from a select group of opinion leaders. Special extras.
  • Everything you need, nothing you don’t.
  • The Weekender: The climate news you need.
Subscribe

• The information comes from a source they perceive as non-credible;

• They identify with groups that are anti-science;

• The information contradicts what they believe is true, good, or valuable;

• The information is delivered in a way that conflicts with how they think about things.

Understanding these psychological reasons for being anti-science is critical, the three authors say, because it helps unpack the rejection of science across many domains and points to potential solutions for increasing scientific acceptance.

No Trust in Scientists

The first key reason people are anti-science is that they don’t see scientists as credible. This happens when scientists’ expertise is questioned, when they are deemed untrustworthy, and when they appear biased. Although debate among scientists is a healthy part of the scientific process, many lay people interpret legitimate scientific debate as a sign that those on either or both sides of the issue are not truly experts on the topic.

Scientists are often distrusted because they are seen as cold and unfeeling. Scientists’ objectivity has also been questioned, as they are seen as being biased against Christian and conservative values.

How can scientists address these credibility gaps? They can communicate to the public that debate is a natural part of the scientific process. To increase trustworthiness, they can convey that their work is motivated by selfless goals.

Resistance

People also tend to reject scientific information when it conflicts with their social identities. For example, there has been continuing debate over scientific studies on the harms of playing video games.

People may also identify with social groups that reject scientific evidence, and hate scientists or those who agree with scientists. For example, those who identify with groups that are skeptical about climate change tend to be quite hostile toward climate change believers.

To tackle this, the authors say, science communicators should find a shared identity with their audience. Research has shown, for example, that when scientists offered their recycled water suggestions to a hostile audience, the audience was more receptive once they found a shared identity. [It also helps to start the conversation with the things that are already most important to that audience—Ed.]

Contradictions

People often reject science because it contradicts their beliefs, attitudes, and values. When scientific information contradicts what people believe is true or good, they feel uncomfortable. They resolve this discomfort by simply rejecting the science. For people who have smoked their entire lives, the evidence that smoking kills is uncomfortable because it contradicts their behaviours. It is far easier to trivialize the science regarding smoking than to change a deeply ingrained habit.

Often, scientific information contradicts existing beliefs due to widespread misinformation. Once misinformation has been spread, it is hard to correct, especially when it provides a causal explanation for the issue at hand.

One effective strategy to combat this is prebunking—warning people that they are about to receive a dose of misinformation—and then refuting it so that people will be better at resisting misinformation when they encounter it.

Scientific evidence can also be rejected for reasons beyond the content of the message. When science is delivered in ways that are at odds with how people think about things, they might reject the message. For example, some people find uncertainty hard to tolerate. For those people, when science is communicated in uncertain terms (as it often is), they tend to reject it.

Science communicators should therefore try to figure out how their audiences approach information and then match their style. They can use the logic of targeted advertising to try and frame scientific messages in different ways to be persuasive for different audiences.

Political Amplification

Political forces are powerful contributors to anti-science attitudes. This is because politics can trigger or amplify all four of the key reasons for being anti-science. Politics can determine which sources seem credible, exposing people with different political ideologies to different scientific information and misinformation.

Politics is also an identity, and so when scientific ideas come from one’s own group, people are more amenable to them.

For example, when a carbon tax is described as being proposed by Republicans, Democrats are more likely to oppose it. When scientific information contradicts people’s politically informed moral values, both conservatives and liberals vehemently oppose it.

Finally, conservatives and liberals differ in their thinking styles and how they generally approach information. For example, conservatives tend to be less tolerant of uncertainty than liberals. These different thinking styles are linked to different degrees of being anti-science.

Understanding Anti-Science

All in all, the three authors write, these core determinants of anti-science attitudes help us understand what is driving rejection of diverse scientific theories and innovations, ranging from new vaccines to the evidence for climate change.

Fortunately, by understanding these bases for being anti-science, we can also better understand how to target such sentiments and increase scientific acceptance.



in Culture, Energy Politics, Media, Messaging, & Public Opinion

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

Oregon Department of Transportation/flickr
Cities & Communities

Shift to Remote Work Cuts Commutes, Frees Downtown Space for Affordable Housing

June 5, 2023
95
moerschy / Pixabay
Cities & Communities

Federal Climate Plans Must Embrace Community-Driven Resilience

June 4, 2023
66
debannja/Pixabay
Ending Emissions

Austin, Texas Council Committee Backs Fossil Non-Proliferation Treaty

June 4, 2023
98

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

/MaxPixels

‘Substantial Damage’, No Injuries as Freight Train Hits Wind Turbine Blade

May 25, 2022
14.7k
Natural Resources Canada

2.7M Hectares Lost, Nova Scotia at Ground Zero in ‘Unprecedented’ Early Wildfire Season

June 4, 2023
217
sunrise windmill

Renewables ‘Set to Soar’ with 440 GW of New Installations in 2023: IEA

June 5, 2023
174
Pixabay

Greek Industrial Giant Announces 1.4-GW Alberta Solar Farm, Canada’s Biggest

June 4, 2023
144
Equinor

Is Equinor’s Bay du Nord ‘Delay’ a Cancellation in Slow Motion?

June 1, 2023
894
Neal Alderson/Twitter

Out-of-Control Wildfire Burns Homes, Forces Evacuations Outside Halifax

May 29, 2023
2.7k

Recent Posts

Oregon Department of Transportation/flickr

Shift to Remote Work Cuts Commutes, Frees Downtown Space for Affordable Housing

June 5, 2023
95
Clairewych/Pixabay

Demand Surges for Giant Heat Pumps as Europe Turns to District Heating

June 4, 2023
107
nicolasdebraypointcom/pixabay

Factor Gender into Transportation Planning, IISD Analyst Urges Policy-Makers

June 4, 2023
40
moerschy / Pixabay

Federal Climate Plans Must Embrace Community-Driven Resilience

June 4, 2023
66
debannja/Pixabay

Austin, Texas Council Committee Backs Fossil Non-Proliferation Treaty

June 4, 2023
98
Ottawa Renewable Energy Co-op/Facebook

‘Hinge Moment’ for Humanity Demands ‘YIMBY’ Mentality: McKibben

June 1, 2023
81
Next Post
Green Energy Futures/flickr

Solar Shingle Buying Guide Lays Out Options for Curious Homeowners

The Energy Mix - The climate news you need

Copyright 2023 © Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Proudly partnering with…

scf_withtagline
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}