Trust in science: assessing pandemic impacts in four EU countries
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Trust in science: assessing pandemic impacts in four EU countries
Discussion paper by Cissi Askvall, Massimiano Bucchi, Birte Fähnrich, Brian Trench, Markus
Weißkopf1
Trust in science can be considered an im- that the barometer is actually measuring dif-
portant aspect of science’s situation in society; ferences in political systems and civic cultures.
in a crisis like the Covid-19 pandemic, these Some academic writers have challenged this
trust relations are accentuated and severely kind of survey work and the conceptions of
tested. Facing the novelty, complexity and trust on which they are based. The distinction
wide impacts of the new coronavirus, the lim- is often made in sociology between personal
its of scientific knowledge have been exposed trust and institutional trust on the basis that
and scientists have appealed for understand- trust of individuals is relational, in a way that
ing and trust that they are doing their best to
is not possible for institutions. Political scien-
overcome these limits. tist Russell Hardin (2006) suggests that confi-
Public health experts, virologists, epidemiolo- dence is a better term than trust when speak-
gists, immunologists, infectious diseases ex- ing of public attitudes to institutions, includ-
perts, and increasingly also social psycholo- ing science.
gists and political scientists, have been chal- Philosopher Onora O’Neill and science studies
lenged to advocate with confidence for social scholar Brian Wynne have challenged the no-
measures with wide effects even while their tions of a crisis in trust that has particularly
knowledge of the virus and the means to con- strong resonance in discussions of science in
trol or eliminate it is provisional. Either explic- society. O’Neill points out that trust in judges
itly or implicitly they have been saying to their and nurses has always been relatively high,
national and international audiences: This is and politicians and journalists relatively low,
the evidence we have. This is why we advise as and that such poll findings show little varia-
we do. Trust Us. Political leaders, representing tion over time. But it has been common for
their societies, have claimed to be “following many years to situate discussions of trust in
the science”, even as it became clearer that the science in a lament about the decline in trust –
science is diverse and contested. or growth in distrust – of science.
Trust ideas are very popular in many business The British-based advocacy group Sense
fields, for example, in market research on About Science still recalls 20 years after its
brands, or in attempts to theorise the practice
founding that in 2001 “media scare stories
of public relations. Edelman, the global PR
were rife, and public confidence in science was
company, has been tracking trust in business, at an all-time low”. Wynne (2006) challenged
government, media and NGOs for twenty this view as a new deficit model of the public,
years. Their 2019 barometer2 shows that the referring to the “incessant agonising about the
top six countries in the world for trust in gen- ‘public mistrust of science’ problem … there is
eral are all Asian, China being the clear leader, no general, indiscriminate public mistrust or
followed by several other notably authoritar- rejection of ‘science’; indeed, there are lots of
ian countries. In their table of 26 countries, six enthusiasm for it – but this is discriminating
of the seven with the lowest trust (or highest enthusiasm”.
distrust) are European. This strongly suggests
1It has long been thought that greater level of confidence in their own knowledge of
knowledge of science among the public would science. For Italian respondents, this relation-
contribute to greater trust; Wynne (2006) pre- ship was direct rather than inverse. More gen-
sented this as No. 1 of nine ‘scientific deficits erally from the same report, Australia, New
of understanding of publics’, though in the re- Zealand and northern Europe recorded the top
verse form: Public mistrusts science because it levels of ‘high trust’ in science, and it was
is ignorant of science. Wynne sees this as a noted that those with higher incomes tended
demonstration of “persistent routine external- to show higher trust. These findings may again
ization and projection onto others of its [sci- be reflecting wider socio-political and socio-
ence’s] own possible responsibility for public economic differences.
disaffection or disagreement”. In 2019-20, as the epidemic was turning to
This perspective supports O’Neill’s efforts to pandemic, the US-based Pew Research Center
shift the focus to trustworthiness (2018). She surveyed the populations of 20 countries4,
points to the dangers of trust in untrustworthy asking respondents inter alia to state whether
agents, writing that it is “puzzling that so much they had a lot, some, or not too much trust in
contemporary investigation and discussion of scientists to do what is right for their respec-
trust and levels of trust, particularly when tive societies. Percentages answering ‘a lot’
based on evidence provided by polls, says little ranged from 59 in India and 48 in Australia
– all too often nothing – about what it takes to and Spain, to 23 in Brazil and Japan, 14 in Tai-
direct trust to trustworthy institutions and wan and 11 in South Korea. Three of the four
persons, or to direct mistrust to untrustworthy countries represented by the present authors
persons and institutions”. were covered by this survey: in Sweden 46 per
cent declared ‘a lot’ of trust in scientists, in
So, what makes science trustworthy? Science
Germany 43 per cent, and in Italy 33 per cent.
historian Naomi Oreskes (2019) finds the an-
swer in the processes of science, in its constant Surveys focused on public attitudes to the pan-
scrutiny of itself, and she advocates for more demic were undertaken in 2020 by the Pew
open acknowledgement of the social and per- Research Center in 14 countries5 and by Kan-
sonal dimensions of science. Similarly, Ivan tar in 21 EU member states for the European
Oransky, co-founder of the science publishing Parliament6. The Pew study asked respond-
watchdog, Retraction Watch, argues that re- ents to rate their countries’ handling of Covid-
tractions of scientific papers, which might be 19: Germans showed high approval at 88 per
thought to contribute to distrust in science, cent (combined ‘very good’ and ‘somewhat
“are a sign someone is paying attention … It’s good’ job) and Italians and Swedes near-me-
when you deny that problems happen that you dian levels at 74 and 71 per cent respectively.
lose trust” (Wysong 2020). The Kantar study asked which sources of infor-
Survey findings show that the relationship be- mation on the pandemic respondents trusted
tween trust and knowledge is contingent and most: ‘scientists’ were the most frequently
contradictory, at least as far as self-perceived mentioned (by 41 per cent of respondents),
knowledge is concerned. The Wellcome Global ahead of national health authorities (34),
Monitor 20183 findings for the four countries World Health Organisation (24) and national
represented among the present authors show governments (22). Scientists received most
that Irish respondents exhibited the highest mentions in Italy and Germany, but national
levels of trust – as measured in a Trust in Sci- health authorities had top ranking in Sweden
ence Index compiled from responses to several and Ireland.
pertinent questions – but the second-lowest
2These various findings illustrate the need for of science. In contrast, there is a very high level
caution in comparing between surveys that of trust in the expertise of scientists.
may have been undertaken with different pur- In a coronavirus special edition of the Science
poses and methods. When it comes to findings Barometer in spring 2020, one could observe
specifically on trust the precise wording of the a substantial increase in trust in science in
questions has a significant bearing. With these general (73 per cent stating they trusted sci-
cautions in mind, we present summaries of the ence completely or somewhat). The respond-
evidence on public trust in science in four Eu- ents also believed that science had a high level
ropean countries, before and during the Covid- of problem-solving abilities and expected a
19 pandemic. vaccine or medication to be developed soon.
A large number of respondents also agreed
Germany that the scientists had done well in communi-
cating scientific uncertainties with regard to
An annual representative public attitudes sur-
the coronavirus pandemic. A majority also had
vey Science Barometer (Wissenschaftsbarom-
a positive view of scientific controversies: they
eter) was established in 2014 by the German
agreed that different points of view are im-
science communication organisation Wissen-
portant for scientific progress.
schaft im Dialog (Science in Dialogue). The
Wissenschaftsbarometer but also Eurobarom- In addition, 81 per cent supported political de-
eter data from the years prior to 2014 show cision-making on the coronavirus pandemic
that there is a relatively stable trust in science that is based on scientific results; this also rep-
over time in Germany. From 2017 to 2019 resented a significant increase on comparable
around 50 per cent of the respondents say that findings in the context of climate change in the
they completely or somewhat trust science and autumn 2019 survey.
research7. One item that has also been in- In the regular survey at the end of 202010, a
cluded in the Eurobarometer8 allows us to look decline in absolute trust values could be ob-
back further on this issue: “We depend too served (from 73 per cent in April and 66 per
much on science and not enough on faith”. The cent in May to 60 per cent in November).
approval of this statement was very stable over Nonetheless, these levels remained above
time in Germany, ranging from 32 to 40 per those of 2017-19. The values also remained
cent, which is lower than the average of all Eu- above the pre-pandemic values for the other
ropean countries. Wissenschaftsbarometer trust-related items.
and Eurobarometer data also show high inter-
est in science and research in Germany with up In addition to the standard items, a few addi-
to 60 per cent of respondents stating they have tional questions were asked in November
a very strong or somewhat strong interest in 2020, mainly dealing with the topic of disin-
science and research. formation and scepticism about the corona-
virus pandemic. Two results in particular are
Since 2017 the Science Barometer also in- worth noting: 40 per cent of respondents think
cluded a number of items measuring reasons that scientists are not telling them the whole
to (dis-)trust science9. Results showed that a truth about the coronavirus; and 15 per cent
possible distrust of the population is based in agree with the statement, "There is no real
particular on doubts whether science is work- proof that the coronavirus really exists".
ing towards the common good and - with some
reservations - on concerns about the integrity
3Ireland equal-highest with Denmark in the proportion
of respondents naming their national govern-
The most recent study on trust in science was
ment among their most trusted sources.
the Science in Ireland Barometer 201511, which
found that 22 per cent of respondents had ‘a From March 2020, the Department of Health
lot’ of trust in advice given by the scientific conducted tracking surveys to inform commu-
community. The report’s authors stated that nication strategies and the findings were made
“this indicates the presence of a ‘trust deficit’ public13. The questions covered such items as
between experts and the wider population”, personal behaviours to mitigate virus trans-
although 60 per cent said they had ‘some trust’ mission, emotional wellbeing, attitudes to na-
in such advice and among 15-19-year-olds the tional policies, including social restrictions,
‘lot of trust’ response was 44 per cent. On a dif- and sources of information, but no questions
ferent question, “When you hear/read an relating to trust or confidence in science or ex-
opinion from a scientist or engineer, how perts.
much do you trust it?”, 17 per cent responded However, there may be an indication of chang-
they completed trusted it and 32 per cent that
ing attitudes on that issue. From June to Octo-
they had a great deal of trust. ber, the percentage of respondents saying they
Public opinion polling during the pandemic thought there should be “more restrictions”
did not ask comparable questions, though sur- rose from 20 per cent to over 60, just surpas-
vey work for a new Science in Ireland Barom- sing the level recorded in March 2020. The
eter was conducted in late 2020 and the results case for more restrictions was being argued
will be published in 2021. through the summer and autumn with in-
creasing force by scientists, both individually
A survey of the Irish population for the inter-
and in groups – often in the face of resistance
national Veracity Index in May 2020 posed the
from politicians and economic interests.
trust question in a particular form: “I will read
you a list of different types of people. For each,
would you tell me if you generally trust them Italy
to tell the truth or not?” The highest levels of
positive responses (expressed in percentages) The key source for data on trust in science in
were assigned to Nurses (97), Local Pharma- Italy is the Observa Science and Technology in
cists (96), Doctors (95), National Public Society Monitor, which has been running since
Health Emergency Team (91), Teachers (89) 2003 an annual survey of public perceptions
and Scientists (87)12. In none of these cases and attitudes to science and technology. Data
was the change since December 2018 more from the Monitor confirm general interna-
than three percentage points. The Covid-19 ef- tional trends, showing high and increasing lev-
fect is seen more noticeably in categories lower els of trust in science.
down the rankings for declared trust: Gardaí The general perception that benefits of science
(police service) (82, up 9), EU Leaders (58, up are greater than potential risks has increased
15), Government Ministers (47, up 20) and by 14 percentage points in the last decade
Politicians (32, up 10). (from 68 per cent to 82). Specific confidence
These findings correspond with those of the in scientists and engineers has also substan-
Kantar study mentioned earlier; in this, Ire- tially increased, now involving 65 per cent of
land was the only country in which scientists citizens and largely outweighing confidence in
did not feature among the three most fre- other professional categories (e.g. journalists 4
quently named trusted sources, and was per cent, politicians 3 per cent).
4When it comes to sources of science communi- of citizens firmly oppose vaccination) and not
cation, Italians consider the most reliable even of a so-called “negationist” approach to-
sources to be those which connect directly to wards the gravity of the pandemic threat
researchers, like public lectures by scientists (which characterises 6.5 per cent of public
(85 per cent regard them as trustworthy). Data opinion). The central theme appears rather to
collected from two special editions of Observa be trust in institutions and in their long-term
STS Monitor at the outset of the Covid-19 pan- operational capacity.
demic (March and April 2020) offered further
confirmation and specifications in this light 14.
Almost the totality of citizens (97 per cent) ex- Sweden
pressed confidence that scientists will find a VA (Public & Science), a national non-profit
solution to this pandemic, with 24 per cent ex- organisation promoting dialogue and open-
pecting the solution will come soon, and 74 per ness between the public and researchers, has
cent expressing a rather more mature expecta- since 2002 been running two annual surveys
tion that this will happen in a longer time hori- of public attitudes towards science and re-
zon. searchers. One is the VA Barometer, which is a
Data collected during the ongoing pandemic telephone-based survey of c.1,000 respond-
show that citizens rate as most reliable the in- ents, and the other a postal survey gathering
dications from institutions on how to avoid in- c.1,700 responses conducted within the Veten-
fection, while they put very little trust in social skapen i Samhället (Science in Society) pro-
media sources. However, the so-called ‘second ject. The latter is part of the National SOM sur-
wave’ of the pandemic seemed to be character- veys15 in Sweden.
ised by a more critical public perception. Citi- Data from the VA Barometer (VA report
zens’ evaluation of the management of the cri- 2020:4) conducted in September 2020 show
sis by local, national and international institu- that almost nine out of ten Swedes (88 per
tions became increasingly negative. The most cent) have fairly high or very high confidence
negative data concerned the evaluation of the in researchers working in universities, an in-
role of scientific experts, down by 23 per cent crease of nine percentage points from 2019.
and now negative for one-quarter of citizens. Thirteen per cent of the respondents say that
In addition, now almost two-thirds (62 per their confidence in researchers has increased
cent) perceive the diversity of advice publicly during the pandemic, while four out of five (79
given by experts as a potential source of confu- per cent) state that their confidence is unaf-
sion. fected, and five per cent say that their confi-
This change of context is also reflected in the dence has decreased. As seen elsewhere (e.g.
attitudes towards long-awaited vaccines for Johnson and Peifer 2017), there is a clear cor-
Covid-19. Only 36 per cent of Italians ex- relation between respondents’ level of educa-
pressed the intention to receive the vaccine as tion and their confidence level: those with
soon as it will be available. A similar propor- higher education show higher confidence.
tion (38 per cent) expressed the intention to Sweden chose a somewhat different national
receive the vaccine, but not immediately. More strategy to fight the pandemic from that of
than one in five stated they did not intend to most other countries. VA monitored public at-
be vaccinated. titudes and information behaviour during the
These attitudes are not the expression of a ge- pandemic in collaboration with the Karolinska
neric scepticism toward science, nor towards Institute and Södertörn University16. From
vaccination in general (in Italy only 4 per cent March to December 2020, 12 survey waves
5were conducted, based on representative sam- same level as in March 2020). By the same
ples through Kantar Sifo’s national web panel. time, confidence in politicians was 29 per cent,
These showed that the news media have con- in journalists 21 per cent, in government offi-
sistently been the primary source of infor- cials 61 per cent, and in health care providers
mation about the coronavirus for the Swedish commenting in media 91 per cent.
public. Only a small proportion (1–2 per cent)
stated that they mainly access coronavirus in-
formation through social media. Discussion and Conclusions
During early autumn 2020, an increasing pro- The survey findings presented in summary
portion, particularly among younger persons, here show that public trust in science has been
were not accessing any information at all stable or has risen during the Covid-19 pan-
about the virus. But as the number of Covid-19 demic in the four countries under considera-
cases increased again, so did the consumption tion – and, from most indications, well beyond
of news, as well as the confidence in the media these countries. This is worth underlining, as
reporting. it is not self-evident that this would be the
In the March 2020 survey 67 per cent per- case. Scientists and public authorities acting
ceived reporting as fairly or very on their advice have made major demands on
hyped/alarmist; by September this had populations, asking them to change their be-
dropped to 22 per cent, but then rose gradually haviours radically in order to reduce the
and was in December 52 per cent. spread of the virus. Experts have faced the very
Swedes have the greatest confidence in public significant challenge of securing citizens' com-
service media: in December 80 per cent stated pliance with social restrictions while continu-
they had fairly high or very high confidence in ously updating and revising their knowledge.
Swedish Television’s reporting, and 76 per It seems reasonable to assume that the evi-
cent gave this rating to Swedish Radio. The dence of unprecedented international research
Swedish Television, commercial TV4 and Swe- collaboration and the public disclosure of sci-
dish Radio are the news media that most ence-in-the-making have helped secure trust
Swedes have turned to for information about at high levels.
the coronavirus. With the second and third waves of the coro-
navirus pandemic rolling over the globe, this
Swedes’ perception of how much in agreement
trust in science seems more relevant than ever.
various professional groups are in their views
The availability of vaccines opens a new chap-
on how Sweden is handling the pandemic has
ter in this process. The mass vaccinations
also been investigated. In the December sur-
planned in many countries presuppose that
vey, 67 per cent of respondents perceived re-
people have trust in the vaccines that were de-
searchers to be fairly or very much in agree-
veloped under high pressure and in the science
ment. This is an increase of 13 percentage
behind them.
points compared to August, but still lower than
in April, when the corresponding number was However, as Mede and Schäfer (2020) out-
72 per cent. lined recently, counter-scientific and populist
movements are challenging the efforts to de-
Confidence in researchers who comment on feat the virus and pose threats to public order
the coronavirus in the media has been consist- and democratic values. In Germany, the so-
ently high, with minor fluctuations. In Decem- called Querdenker-movement (literally: lat-
ber, 87 per cent said that they have fairly high eral or unconventional thinkers) has devel-
or very high confidence in researchers (the oped a dangerous momentum in recent
6months. The movement has strong connec- the digital media environment, science com-
tions to the radical right and defies public reg- munication communities need to engage with
ulations such as restrictions on social contacts decision-makers, public institutions, business,
and obligations to wear masks in public. civil society organisations and scientific bodies
on how to reach these aims.
It may be that the noisy public presence of
such movements helps maintain a widespread The unprecedented exposure of expert sources
stereotype of the public as distrustful of sci- across media has in many cases been guided
ence or even anti-science. The daily lamenta- more by individual goodwill and intuition than
tions on issues like climate change, mass vac- by reference to accumulated knowledge, pub-
cinations, and anti-pandemic measures per- lic opinion data and audience analysis. Invest-
sist. Such views, either for carelessness or ig- ment in training, institutional recognition of
norance, neglect widely accessible data, which science communication activities, interna-
is quite ironic given that many who share such tional sharing of data and practices, and devel-
arguments claim to be fighting "fake news". opment of comparative studies might be valu-
able steps towards science communication
The relationship between politics and science
that, rather than emphasising distrust or sup-
may contribute further to confusion. Some po-
porting paternalism, sustains and reinforces
litical leaders have sought to build their popu-
social responsibility.
larity on challenging expertise (e.g. Trump,
Bolsonaro, Johnson). This is a backdrop to the
recurrent theme of distrust in science, which References
persists in media and policy discourses. For
some media, these minority groups serve the Hardin, R., 2006. Trust, Polity Press, Cambridge,
news value of controversy, however outlandish UK
the claims of 'coronavirus hoax' and similar Johnson, D. R., Peifer, J. K., 2017. How public con-
claims may be. fidence in higher education varies by social
The role of science communication is critical in context, The Journal of Higher Education,
this context. Indeed, trust in science commu- 88 (4): 619-644
nication becomes a live issue. As mass vaccina- Mede, N. G., Schäfer, M.S., 2020. Science-related
tion programmes are rolled out, major com- populism: conceptualizing populist de-
munication efforts to address various degrees mands toward science, Public Understand-
of vaccine hesitancy and resistance are also be- ing of Science, 29 (5): 473-491; available at
ing undertaken. During the pandemic, how- doi:10.1177/0963662520924259
ever, science communication has sometimes
O’Neill, O., 2018. Linking Trust to Trustworthi-
been given an ideological role, supporting a
ness, International Journal of Philosophi-
paternalistic and ultimately authoritarian vi-
cal Studies, 26 (2): 293-300; available at
sion of science in society, and this may affect
doi: 10.1080/09672559.2018.1454637
the current science communication efforts.
Oreskes, N., 2019. Why trust science? Princetown
Building mutually trusting relationships be-
University Press, Princeton and Oxford.
tween institutions, experts and citizens re-
quires open, clear and trustworthy communi- Wynne, B., 2006. Public engagement as a means of
cation on scientific innovation, methods, restoring public trust in science – hitting
workings and quality standards, and on scien- the notes, but missing the music? Commu-
tists' norms and motives. In the cacophony of nity Genetics, 9: 211-220
7Wysong, P, 2020. The need for rigor: Retractions
can damage public trust, Healthy Debate,
15 July; available at https://healthyde-
bate.ca/2020/07/topic/retractions-dam-
age-trust-covid19
service/files/be-heard/eurobarometer/2020/public_opin-
Notes ion_in_the_eu_in_time_of_coronavirus_crisis/report/en-
covid19-survey-report.pdf
7
1
This discussion paper was developed from the authors’ See https://www.wissenschaft-im-dialog.de/en/our-pro-
contributions to a panel at the Esof (Euroscience Open Fo- jects/science-barometer/
8
rum) conference held in Trieste and virtually in September See Eurobarometer 2005 and 2010 https://www.euro-
2020. The panel was a joint initiative of Eusea (European parl.europa.eu/at-your-service/de/be-heard/eurobarome-
Science Engagement Association) and PCST (Public Commu- ter
9
nication of Science and Technology) Network. CA is presi- Based on the work of Hendricks et al. 2016
dent and MW former president of Eusea. BT is president of https://www.researchgate.net/publica-
PCST and MB and BF are members of its Scientific Commit- tion/297569382_Trust_in_Science_and_the_Sci-
tee. ence_of_Trust
2 10
Report available at: https://www.edel- available at www.sciencebarometer.com
man.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/2019-02/2019_Edel- 11
Science Foundation Ireland, October 2015: Science in Ire-
man_Trust_Barometer_Global_Report.pdf land Barometer; report available at: https://www.sfi.ie/re-
3
Reports available at: https://wellcome.org/reports/well- sources/Science-in-Ireland-Barometer-Key-Points.pdf
come-global-monitor/2018 12
Ipsos-MRBI, June 2020: Ipsos MRBI Veracity Index 2020;
4
Pew Research Center, September 2020: Science and scien- report available at: https://www.ipsos.com/en-ie/ipsos-
tists held in high esteem across global publics; available at: mrbi-veracity-index-2020
https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/09/29/sci- 13
Reports available at: https://www.gov.ie/en/collec-
ence-and-scientists-held-in-high-esteem-across-global-pub- tion/6b4401-view-the-amarach-public-opinion-survey/
lics/ 14
Reports available at https://sagepus.blog-
5
Pew Research Center, August 2020: Most approve of na- spot.com/2020/03/italian-citizens-and-covid-19.html
tional response to Covid-19 in 14 advanced economies; and https://sagepus.blogspot.com/2020/04/italian-citizens-
available at: https://www.pewre- and-covid-19-one-month.html; see also www.observa.it
search.org/global/2020/08/27/most-approve-of-national- 15
The National SOM surveys are conducted by the SOM in-
response-to-covid-19-in-14-advanced-economies/ stitute at the University of Gothenburg. The surveys consist
6
Kantar, June 2020: Uncertainty / EU / Hope – public opin- of several parallel questionnaires and include questions re-
ion survey commissioned by the European Parliament; re- lated to politics, society, media and social background.
port available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/at-your- 16
https://v-a.se/english-portal/projects/studies/the-pub-
lic/corona/
8You can also read
