Public views of coronavirus science and scientists: findings from a cross-sectional survey
Public views of coronavirus science and scientists: findings from a cross-sectional survey
Background: Throughout the coronavirus pandemic, references to scientific findings have permeated public-facing communications. Understanding how members of the public view science, scientists and scientific uncertainty should enhance approaches to communication and individuals’ decisions to engage with public health measures, including restrictions and vaccination programmes.
Methods: A survey was conducted on our behalf by YouGov in November 2020. The survey asked about: level of public trust in scientists and scientific information; changes in trust between March and November 2020; views about communication of scientific uncertainty; confidence in the accuracy of scientific findings; and views about whether public information is an accurate representation of coronavirus science.
Results: The sample comprised 2,025 individuals living in England; 40.5% were ≥55 years old, 51.1% were female, and 12.3% identified as members of an ethnic minority/mixed ethnicity. Here, we present descriptive statistics across six key variables: age, gender, ethnicity, keyworker status, shielding status, and coronavirus exposure. Trust was highest among older respondents and those who identified as of white ethnicity. The concurrent (November 2020) levels of reported trust in scientific information about coronavirus were generally lower than those reported retrospectively for the start of the pandemic (March 2020). There was higher trust and positivity about science among people who had been shielding and among those who had not contracted coronavirus. Around half of respondents did not think that the uncertainty in science was conveyed much or at all, most were confident in the accuracy of coronavirus science, and around half thought that public information was a true representation of the science.
Conclusions: Our study indicates that there is room to improve trust and communication in science. As well as detailed analyses to account for inter-relationships, further research could examine reasons behind change in trust over time and any persisting patterns by age, ethnicity, and shielding status.
Gooberman Hill, Rachael
7464450e-287b-4f00-bc64-21a3fcba88a6
Taylor, Michelle L.
6550a70a-8217-442c-bcfb-284c1d60e7e2
Maude, Ulrike
0cdef707-6aa7-4686-a324-5d32bef7ad90
Yardley, Lucy
64be42c4-511d-484d-abaa-f8813452a22e
Huxtable, Richard
92e04e6d-d637-466c-90e6-52cc947c4b19
Stubbs, Jo
acfc8f29-ca09-4420-80da-1b87c8ae855a
Peters, Tim J.
095c017f-d6c3-4006-bb02-d144abfbce5b
Gooberman Hill, Rachael
7464450e-287b-4f00-bc64-21a3fcba88a6
Taylor, Michelle L.
6550a70a-8217-442c-bcfb-284c1d60e7e2
Maude, Ulrike
0cdef707-6aa7-4686-a324-5d32bef7ad90
Yardley, Lucy
64be42c4-511d-484d-abaa-f8813452a22e
Huxtable, Richard
92e04e6d-d637-466c-90e6-52cc947c4b19
Stubbs, Jo
acfc8f29-ca09-4420-80da-1b87c8ae855a
Peters, Tim J.
095c017f-d6c3-4006-bb02-d144abfbce5b
Gooberman Hill, Rachael, Taylor, Michelle L., Maude, Ulrike, Yardley, Lucy, Huxtable, Richard, Stubbs, Jo and Peters, Tim J.
(2021)
Public views of coronavirus science and scientists: findings from a cross-sectional survey.
Welcome Open Research.
(doi:10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16780.1).
Abstract
Background: Throughout the coronavirus pandemic, references to scientific findings have permeated public-facing communications. Understanding how members of the public view science, scientists and scientific uncertainty should enhance approaches to communication and individuals’ decisions to engage with public health measures, including restrictions and vaccination programmes.
Methods: A survey was conducted on our behalf by YouGov in November 2020. The survey asked about: level of public trust in scientists and scientific information; changes in trust between March and November 2020; views about communication of scientific uncertainty; confidence in the accuracy of scientific findings; and views about whether public information is an accurate representation of coronavirus science.
Results: The sample comprised 2,025 individuals living in England; 40.5% were ≥55 years old, 51.1% were female, and 12.3% identified as members of an ethnic minority/mixed ethnicity. Here, we present descriptive statistics across six key variables: age, gender, ethnicity, keyworker status, shielding status, and coronavirus exposure. Trust was highest among older respondents and those who identified as of white ethnicity. The concurrent (November 2020) levels of reported trust in scientific information about coronavirus were generally lower than those reported retrospectively for the start of the pandemic (March 2020). There was higher trust and positivity about science among people who had been shielding and among those who had not contracted coronavirus. Around half of respondents did not think that the uncertainty in science was conveyed much or at all, most were confident in the accuracy of coronavirus science, and around half thought that public information was a true representation of the science.
Conclusions: Our study indicates that there is room to improve trust and communication in science. As well as detailed analyses to account for inter-relationships, further research could examine reasons behind change in trust over time and any persisting patterns by age, ethnicity, and shielding status.
Text
Public views of coronavirus science_rachael_gooberman-hill
- Version of Record
More information
e-pub ahead of print date: 29 June 2021
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 452655
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/452655
PURE UUID: ddcabd9a-8d95-42fa-bdb4-e7df84562fd5
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 11 Dec 2021 11:31
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 02:47
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Rachael Gooberman Hill
Author:
Michelle L. Taylor
Author:
Ulrike Maude
Author:
Richard Huxtable
Author:
Jo Stubbs
Author:
Tim J. Peters
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics