by: Amanda Rioux, and the UMass Dartmouth biology students
Why does the public distrust science so much, and how can we help to restore that trust?
Lately, public trust and confidence in science has been a hot topic. Many people express their outrage on social media over how they feel about the COVID-19 vaccine, for example, and how they distrust the scientists who created it.
So, how did we get here? How can we help?
That is the topic discussed with the scientists today.
“Why do you think there is misinformation/mistrust of scientists?”
Stephanie: I think there can be mistrust of scientists sometimes because it is encouraged by individuals (for example, politicians, celebrities, social media influencers, or other individuals with a large following) that many people really trust over this scientist that may have a PhD, but they never heard of before.
There’s also the case of the information coming from someone they personally know (like from a social media post that their friend shared), which could make them trust that information even if it’s not true.
Also, the majority of the public does not see the actual science happening (for example, all the time planning and how long the actual trials go on for), so they will have mistrust in something that they don’t have all the facts about and didn’t see for themselves.
Sometimes, people don’t know where to look for the actual truth too. Even if they do find the correct information, sometimes understanding data for the actual trends that it shows can be challenging.
Ryan: I believe that most of this misinformation stems from the lack of communication directly from scientists to the public at large.
If scientists as a whole were better at presenting their information to the public in easily digestible forms there would be less confusion on the data overall.
Unfortunately, in the age we live in there is always a constant flux of information on social media that does not have any sources attached.
While some may question the authenticity of the information, a large portion simply take that information as fact without thinking twice.
I think providing these sources as a scientist, and offering direct communication, can aid the public in combating misinformation.
Muhammad: As explained above, it can be many different reasons but usually it is the political influence over research which creates skepticism.
Especially if two researchers have different opinions on the same question about a research topic. It creates confusion among the public.
Abhi: Academia feels like an ivory tower, where higher education and intellectual superiority govern study results. This can feel alienating to a non-scientist, especially a non-scientist without a rigorous educational background.
Another issue is that nutrition science is often front and center in the news for non-scientists. One day, fat is bad, another day carbs are bad and one year later fat is a panacea. This fickleness breeds distrust in science overall, but nutrition science is an extremely fast-moving and fickle field that is NOT representative of all of science.
It’s a similar situation for psychological studies; modern psychology is a young and extremely complex field, so much is yet unknown, yet pop psychology news articles pull readers from side to side every day.
It also doesn’t help that studies that used questionable methods and produced low-significance results can become sensationalized due to their ‘cool’ subject matter (case in point, the “Mars Fungus”).
Kenneth: There is a lot of mistrust of science especially when it has been politicized or monetized. Additionally, I think that a lack of transparency in the scientific process has contributed to mistrust.
For example, the misinformation around the COVID-19 vaccine seems to stem from the politicization of COVID-19. Prior to COVID-19, I cannot recall a time where vaccine hesitancy was so widespread*.
*Editor’s note: While there was an anti-vaccine movement in the 1990s, due to a now-discredited study, the movement was nowhere near the size it is today. Other small-scale anti-vaccine movements occurred throughout history, but none reached the scale of the modern anti-vaccine movement. Perhaps social media is to blame for the more wide-scale vaccine hesitancy we are seeing now.
“How can we help the public gain trust in scientists and the scientific process?”
Stephanie: I think that getting many individuals who have large followings to advocate for trust in science and convey important information about it to those who follow them would help with gaining trust in science.
Ryan: In order to generate more trust from the public, and combat misinformation, we as scientists need to make it priority to communicate our science to the general public in a way that is easy to digest and encourages participation and questions.
I believe this participation will give the opportunity for the public to voice their concerns and add trust as the origin of the information is no longer shrouded in any way.
Muhammad: We need more medical scribes that can evaluate scientific writing and try to connect the public and the scientific. It should be common practice for the scientific community to public in journals that are more accessible to the public and readable.
Abhi: I think one of the most important things to convey is this: the scientific process is rigorous.
It also prevents theories from becoming ‘absolute truths’, which is a great thing because it allows us to update our practices/recommendations/treatments when enough opposing and convincing evidence arises.
Kenneth: The best way to gain the public’s trust is to be transparent with the science that we’re doing and why it’s important.
It’s nice to say that we’re doing science for the sake of it and to use really technical processes, but the public becomes much more invested in the science when the process is clearly laid out for them.
I think that people like Rachel Carson and her book Silent Spring were really effective at reaching the public because the science wasn’t hidden behind closed doors.