E fundit!

16:03 TODAY

Formal competitions in the State Police

Today, the ranking of candidates expected to take over the...

Great faith in science, as long as it doesn't bother you

2025-01-22 08:40:00, Kosova & Bota CNA

Many people trust researchers and want science to have more influence on society and politics, a global survey finds. But only as long as the research doesn't limit their freedoms.

According to a global survey of nearly 72,000 people in 68 countries, there is no general crisis of trust in science. Despite the drastic measures taken to combat the Corona pandemic, people have not turned away from science, as claimed.

The TISP study is the largest survey of trust in scientists since the pandemic. It appears that many respondents want science to be more involved in society and politics.

Overall, 78% of respondents believe that scientists are qualified to conduct quality research. 57% perceive them as honest, and 75% believe that the scientific method is the best way to discover the truth.

The Corona pandemic - a test for politics and science

According to the study, women, the elderly, people with higher education, higher incomes, and those living in urban areas have greater trust in scientists. Liberal political attitudes and religiosity also have a positive effect on trust in science.

In contrast, social dominance orientation has a negative effect. Social dominance orientation (SDO) describes the desire for stronger groups to control weaker groups and is negatively associated with values ??such as equality and social justice.

Massive pressure on science under Trump

The general poll was released to coincide with Trump taking office. The pressure on research and science in the US will continue to increase. Since his first term, Trump has clashed with much of the science and questioned scientific findings.

President Trump denies the climate crisis and has placed his friends critical of science in key decision-making positions: Health Secretary Kennedy is an opponent of vaccines, Energy Secretary Wright comes from the oil and fracking industry, Defense Secretary Hegseth does not believe in infections, Education Secretary McMahon wants to leave education to parents because, according to her, many teachers and professors cannot be trusted.

It is especially scientific fields such as climate and gender research or ethnology that fear massive political influence, because they are considered left-wing or "woke" sciences in right-wing nationalist circles. There is a fear that unwanted research will be hindered, that researchers will limit themselves or turn their backs on the important place of scientific research, the USA.

The notion of "trust" is inherently vague. That's why experts welcome the fact that for the global survey, four different aspects of researchers' trustworthiness were examined using twelve different questions: the researchers' perceived competence, their honesty, their openness to criticism, and their interest in the well-being of society.

Researchers such as Hans Peter, professor at the Institute of Communication Sciences and Journalism at the Free University of Berlin, consider it particularly positive that the survey "debunks the myth of a global crisis of trust in science."

Mathias Frisch, professor at the Institute of Philosophy at the Leibniz University of Hanover, also thinks so: "Recently, public discourse has often created the impression that trust in science has declined significantly, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this international study, impressive in its scope, contradict this widespread narrative.

Should science be more involved in politics and society?

However, experts are surprised to find that the majority of respondents worldwide are in favor of researchers being involved in politics. This is remarkable, explains Mathias Fritsch, especially since many researchers "are quite critical of the idea of ??scientists actively supporting political positions, because they fear (...) that they could be misused to exert political influence."

"In the case of the Corona pandemic, we typically saw the opposite, that politics uses science and scientists to avoid deciding for itself. Instead of publicly taking responsibility for a decision as a government, when politics disagreed, it was claimed that "science" had concluded that it was necessary to act this way and not otherwise," explains Kohring, a communication researcher at the University of Mannheim.

Frank Marcinkowski from Heinrich Heine University in Düsseldorf interprets this desire as "dissatisfaction with democratic politics. Those who demand that so-called experts, scientists or intelligent technologies have more influence usually do so because they no longer trust party politics to solve problems," explains the media specialist.

However, only populists promise simple solutions, which rarely exist. According to Marcinkowskitt, "we are increasingly faced, both globally and nationally, with increasingly complex problem situations that are increasingly difficult to 'solve' or at least to reconcile. For many problems, "neither science nor politics has a 'solution', but of course they do not admit this. Accordingly, political conflicts unfold even more fiercely and interest groups clash more irreconcilably." Trust ends when personal freedom is affected

When politicians make unpopular decisions based on scientific results, which limit, for example, personal freedoms or the standard of living, the desired integration of science into the decision-making process quickly reaches its limits.

This is not only evident in the field of climate change, says Matthias Kohring from the University of Mannheim. "The Corona period has shown that many people are resisting precisely this commitment, for example wearing masks, staying at home or not going on holiday," notes the media expert. Ultimately, science only provides the basis for decision-making, but it is up to politics to make the decisions. "Of course it is reasonable for politicians to make decisions based on the best available knowledge - and this is usually scientific knowledge," concludes communications specialist Marcinkowski./ DW