Search

In many countries, the COVID-19 pandemic led to increased public support for societal institutions including science, a phenomenon described as "rally-round-the-flag" dynamic. However, it is unclear if this dynamic has also reduced public resentment toward science such as science-related populist attitudes, that is, the preference of people's common sense over allegedly elitist scientific knowledge. We test this, relying on individual-level data from panel surveys before and during the pandemic in Switzerland. Results show that science-related populist attitudes decreased after the pandemic started. The decrease was more pronounced among people who had been strong supporters of science-related populism prior to the pandemic, but otherwise spread equally across different sociodemographic and attitudinal segments of the Swiss population. This shows that the Coronavirus outbreak has the potential to undermine persistent (populist) resentments toward science and its epistemology among the general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several meta-analytical attempts to reproduce results of empirical research have failed in recent years, prompting scholars and news media to diagnose a "replication crisis" and voice concerns about science losing public credibility. Others, in contrast, hoped replication efforts could improve public confidence in science. Yet nationally representative evidence backing these concerns or hopes is scarce. We provide such evidence, conducting a secondary analysis of the German "Science Barometer" ("Wissenschaftsbarometer") survey. We find that most Germans are not aware of the "replication crisis." In addition, most interpret replication efforts as indicative of scientific quality control and science's self-correcting nature. However, supporters of the populist right-wing party AfD tend to believe that the "crisis" shows one cannot trust science, perhaps using it as an argument to discredit science. But for the majority of Germans, hopes about reputational benefits of the "replication crisis" for science seem more justified than concerns about detrimental effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars of science communication have identified population segments that differ in their perceptions of and attitudes toward science as well as in their patterns of science-related information and media use. So far, however, most of these studies employed quantitative, standardized methods and their descriptions could not go into qualitative detail. This study fills this gap: It delivers an in-depth description of members of four audience segments that were identified in a prior, representative survey in Switzerland. Forty-one of these survey respondents, representing different segments, were asked to note their encounters with science in smartphone-based diaries, and diary entries were discussed in qualitative follow-up interviews. Results show that the segments differ in their criteria for identifying science, expectations toward science, and their reasons to use science communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People’s attitudes toward climate change differ, and these differences may correspond to distinct patterns of media use and information seeking. However, studies extending analyses of attitude types and their specific media diets to countries beyond the United States are lacking. We use a secondary analysis of survey data from Germany to identify attitudes toward climate change among the German public and specify those segments of the population based on their media use and information seeking. Similar to the Global Warming’s Six Americas study, we find distinct attitudes (Global Warming’s Five Germanys) that differ in climate change–related perceptions as well as in media use and communicative behavior. These findings can help tailor communication campaigns regarding climate change to specific audiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The presentation of science in the mass media is one of the most important questions facing social scientists who analyse science. Accordingly, media coverage of science has been a constant focal point in the respective literature, and a flurry of such publications has appeared in the past few years. Yet the activity and growth of the respective research have not been accompanied by systematic overviews. This article aims to provide such an overview by means of a meta-analysis: it analyses existing studies systematically and provides an empirical overview of the literature. The analysis shows that while the research field grew significantly in the past few years and employs a variety of research strategies and methods, it has been biased in three ways: mainly natural sciences (and namely biosciences and medicine), Western countries, and print media have been analysed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]