1978年至2018年间公众对科学家信任的两极分化使用可解释的机器学习进行跨十年比较的见解。

Q2 Social Sciences
Nan Li, Yachao Qian
{"title":"1978年至2018年间公众对科学家信任的两极分化使用可解释的机器学习进行跨十年比较的见解。","authors":"Nan Li,&nbsp;Yachao Qian","doi":"10.1017/pls.2021.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The U.S. public's trust in scientists reached a new high in 2019 despite the collision of science and politics witnessed by the country. This study examines the cross-decade shift in public trust in scientists by analyzing General Social Survey data (1978-2018) using interpretable machine learning algorithms. The results suggest a polarization of public trust as political ideology made an increasingly important contribution to predicting trust over time. Compared with previous decades, many conservatives started to lose trust in scientists completely between 2008 and 2018. Although the marginal importance of political ideology in contributing to trust was greater than that of party identification, it was secondary to that of education and race in 2018. We discuss the practical implications and lessons learned from using machine learning algorithms to examine public opinion trends.</p>","PeriodicalId":35901,"journal":{"name":"Politics and the Life Sciences","volume":"41 1","pages":"45-54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Polarization of public trust in scientists between 1978 and 2018 <i>Insights from a cross-decade comparison using interpretable machine learning</i>.\",\"authors\":\"Nan Li,&nbsp;Yachao Qian\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/pls.2021.18\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The U.S. public's trust in scientists reached a new high in 2019 despite the collision of science and politics witnessed by the country. This study examines the cross-decade shift in public trust in scientists by analyzing General Social Survey data (1978-2018) using interpretable machine learning algorithms. The results suggest a polarization of public trust as political ideology made an increasingly important contribution to predicting trust over time. Compared with previous decades, many conservatives started to lose trust in scientists completely between 2008 and 2018. Although the marginal importance of political ideology in contributing to trust was greater than that of party identification, it was secondary to that of education and race in 2018. We discuss the practical implications and lessons learned from using machine learning algorithms to examine public opinion trends.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics and the Life Sciences\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"45-54\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics and the Life Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2021.18\",\"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.2021.18","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: 7

摘要

尽管美国目睹了科学与政治的碰撞,但美国公众对科学家的信任在2019年达到了新高。本研究通过使用可解释的机器学习算法分析综合社会调查数据(1978-2018),研究了公众对科学家信任的跨十年转变。结果表明,随着时间的推移,政治意识形态对预测信任的贡献越来越大,公众信任的两极分化。与前几十年相比,许多保守派在2008年至2018年间开始完全失去对科学家的信任。尽管政治意识形态在促进信任方面的重要性高于政党认同,但在2018年,它在教育和种族方面的重要性仅次于政治意识形态。我们讨论了使用机器学习算法来检查民意趋势的实际意义和经验教训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Polarization of public trust in scientists between 1978 and 2018 Insights from a cross-decade comparison using interpretable machine learning.

The U.S. public's trust in scientists reached a new high in 2019 despite the collision of science and politics witnessed by the country. This study examines the cross-decade shift in public trust in scientists by analyzing General Social Survey data (1978-2018) using interpretable machine learning algorithms. The results suggest a polarization of public trust as political ideology made an increasingly important contribution to predicting trust over time. Compared with previous decades, many conservatives started to lose trust in scientists completely between 2008 and 2018. Although the marginal importance of political ideology in contributing to trust was greater than that of party identification, it was secondary to that of education and race in 2018. We discuss the practical implications and lessons learned from using machine learning algorithms to examine public opinion trends.

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