另类科学,另类专家,另类政治。西欧伪科学信仰的根源

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES
F. Bordignon
{"title":"另类科学,另类专家,另类政治。西欧伪科学信仰的根源","authors":"F. Bordignon","doi":"10.1080/14782804.2023.2177838","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Covid-19 pandemic has given further centrality to science within the public debate. But it has also acted as a great multiplier for pseudoscientific (conspiracy) theories. This exploratory study investigates the determinants of pseudoscientific beliefs in five European countries, using data from a survey conducted in May 2021. The concept of pseudoscience is theoretically framed and then operationalised by constructing a Pseudo-scientific Beliefs Index (PBI). Results show that exposure to scientific information does not ‘protect’ against unsound scientific claims, if not complemented by a correct understanding of the division of scientific labour. Pseudoscientific views are strongly associated with distrust of official science. But, in the context of today’s information abundance, even more relevant is the spread of epistemological populism, which fosters reliance on alternative sources and the pseudo-expertise of ‘alternative scientific authorities’. The embrace of ‘alternative scientific facts’ is also associated with electoral support for populist parties.","PeriodicalId":46035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Studies","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alternative science, alternative experts, alternative politics. The roots of pseudoscientific beliefs in Western Europe\",\"authors\":\"F. Bordignon\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14782804.2023.2177838\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Covid-19 pandemic has given further centrality to science within the public debate. But it has also acted as a great multiplier for pseudoscientific (conspiracy) theories. This exploratory study investigates the determinants of pseudoscientific beliefs in five European countries, using data from a survey conducted in May 2021. The concept of pseudoscience is theoretically framed and then operationalised by constructing a Pseudo-scientific Beliefs Index (PBI). Results show that exposure to scientific information does not ‘protect’ against unsound scientific claims, if not complemented by a correct understanding of the division of scientific labour. Pseudoscientific views are strongly associated with distrust of official science. But, in the context of today’s information abundance, even more relevant is the spread of epistemological populism, which fosters reliance on alternative sources and the pseudo-expertise of ‘alternative scientific authorities’. The embrace of ‘alternative scientific facts’ is also associated with electoral support for populist parties.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contemporary European Studies\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contemporary European Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14782804.2023.2177838\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary European Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14782804.2023.2177838","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Alternative science, alternative experts, alternative politics. The roots of pseudoscientific beliefs in Western Europe
ABSTRACT The Covid-19 pandemic has given further centrality to science within the public debate. But it has also acted as a great multiplier for pseudoscientific (conspiracy) theories. This exploratory study investigates the determinants of pseudoscientific beliefs in five European countries, using data from a survey conducted in May 2021. The concept of pseudoscience is theoretically framed and then operationalised by constructing a Pseudo-scientific Beliefs Index (PBI). Results show that exposure to scientific information does not ‘protect’ against unsound scientific claims, if not complemented by a correct understanding of the division of scientific labour. Pseudoscientific views are strongly associated with distrust of official science. But, in the context of today’s information abundance, even more relevant is the spread of epistemological populism, which fosters reliance on alternative sources and the pseudo-expertise of ‘alternative scientific authorities’. The embrace of ‘alternative scientific facts’ is also associated with electoral support for populist parties.
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
84
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contemporary European Studies (previously Journal of European Area Studies) seeks to provide a forum for interdisciplinary debate about the theory and practice of area studies as well as for empirical studies of European societies, politics and cultures. The central area focus of the journal is European in its broadest geographical definition. However, the examination of European "areas" and themes are enhanced as a matter of editorial policy by non-European perspectives. The Journal intends to attract the interest of both cross-national and single-country specialists in European studies and to counteract the worst features of Eurocentrism with coverage of non-European views on European themes.
×
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