对科学的乐观与悲观:一种看待公众对科学技术发现和建议评价的新方法

Q2 Social Sciences
Ki Eun Kang, Arnold Vedlitz, Carol L Goldsmith, Ian Seavey
{"title":"对科学的乐观与悲观:一种看待公众对科学技术发现和建议评价的新方法","authors":"Ki Eun Kang, Arnold Vedlitz, Carol L Goldsmith, Ian Seavey","doi":"10.1017/pls.2023.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While there have always been those in the American public who mistrust science and scientists' views of the world, they have tended to be a minority of the larger public. Recent COVID-19 related events indicate that could be changing for some key groups. What might explain the present state of mistrust of science within an important component of the American public? In this study, we delve deeply into this question and examine what citizens today believe about science and technology and why, focusing on core theories of trust, risk concern, and political values and on the important role of science optimism and pessimism orientations. Using national public survey data, we examine the correlates of science optimism and pessimism and test the efficacy of this construct as drivers of biotechnology policy. We find that science optimism and pessimism are empirically useful constructs and that they are important predictors of biotechnology policy choices.</p>","PeriodicalId":35901,"journal":{"name":"Politics and the Life Sciences","volume":" ","pages":"234-253"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimism and pessimism toward science: A new way to look at the public's evaluations of science and technology discoveries and recommendations.\",\"authors\":\"Ki Eun Kang, Arnold Vedlitz, Carol L Goldsmith, Ian Seavey\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/pls.2023.9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>While there have always been those in the American public who mistrust science and scientists' views of the world, they have tended to be a minority of the larger public. Recent COVID-19 related events indicate that could be changing for some key groups. What might explain the present state of mistrust of science within an important component of the American public? In this study, we delve deeply into this question and examine what citizens today believe about science and technology and why, focusing on core theories of trust, risk concern, and political values and on the important role of science optimism and pessimism orientations. Using national public survey data, we examine the correlates of science optimism and pessimism and test the efficacy of this construct as drivers of biotechnology policy. We find that science optimism and pessimism are empirically useful constructs and that they are important predictors of biotechnology policy choices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics and the Life Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"234-253\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics and the Life Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2023.9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics and the Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2023.9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

虽然美国公众中一直有一些人不信任科学和科学家对世界的看法,但他们往往是广大公众中的少数。最近与COVID-19相关的事件表明,一些关键群体的情况可能正在发生变化。怎样才能解释美国公众中一个重要组成部分对科学的不信任现状呢?在本研究中,我们深入研究了这个问题,并研究了今天的公民对科学技术的看法及其原因,重点关注信任、风险关注和政治价值观的核心理论,以及科学乐观主义和悲观主义取向的重要作用。利用全国公众调查数据,我们研究了科学乐观主义和悲观主义的相关性,并测试了这种结构作为生物技术政策驱动因素的有效性。我们发现科学乐观主义和悲观主义是经验上有用的结构,它们是生物技术政策选择的重要预测因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Optimism and pessimism toward science: A new way to look at the public's evaluations of science and technology discoveries and recommendations.

While there have always been those in the American public who mistrust science and scientists' views of the world, they have tended to be a minority of the larger public. Recent COVID-19 related events indicate that could be changing for some key groups. What might explain the present state of mistrust of science within an important component of the American public? In this study, we delve deeply into this question and examine what citizens today believe about science and technology and why, focusing on core theories of trust, risk concern, and political values and on the important role of science optimism and pessimism orientations. Using national public survey data, we examine the correlates of science optimism and pessimism and test the efficacy of this construct as drivers of biotechnology policy. We find that science optimism and pessimism are empirically useful constructs and that they are important predictors of biotechnology policy choices.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Politics and the Life Sciences
Politics and the Life Sciences Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: POLITICS AND THE LIFE SCIENCES is an interdisciplinary peer-reviewed journal with a global audience. PLS is owned and published by the ASSOCIATION FOR POLITICS AND THE LIFE SCIENCES, the APLS, which is both an American Political Science Association (APSA) Related Group and an American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) Member Society. The PLS topic range is exceptionally broad: evolutionary and laboratory insights into political behavior, including political violence, from group conflict to war, terrorism, and torture; political analysis of life-sciences research, health policy, environmental policy, and biosecurity policy; and philosophical analysis of life-sciences problems, such as bioethical controversies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信