It’s not my consensus: Motivated reasoning and the sources of scientific illiteracy

Public Understanding of Science

Volumn 27, Issue 7, 2018, Pages 787-806

  Pasek, Josh ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

motivated reasoning; rejectionism; scientific consensus; scientific literacy

Indexed keywords

EID: 85053386554     PISSN: 09636625     EISSN: 13616609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963662517733681     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Allum N, Sturgis P, Tabourazi D, Brunton-Smith I, (2008) Science knowledge and attitudes across cultures: A meta-analysis. Public Understanding of Science 17(1): 35–54
2. Baker R, Brick JM, Bates NA, Battaglia M, Couper MP, Dever JA, (2013) Summary report of the AAPOR task force on non-probability sampling. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology 1(2): 90–143. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smt008
3. Blank JM, Shaw D, (2015) Does partisanship shape attitudes toward science and public policy? The case for ideology and religion. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 658(1): 18–35
4. Bonanni P, (1999) Demographic impact of vaccination: A review. Vaccine 17: S120–S125
5. Boykoff MT, Boykoff JM, (2007) Climate change and journalistic norms: A case-study of US mass-media coverage. Geoforum 38(6): 1190–1204. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0016718507000188
6. Dunlap RE, McCright AM, (2008) A widening gap: Republican and democratic views on climate change. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 50(5): 26–35
7. Durant JR, Evans GA, Thomas GP, (1989) The public understanding of science. Nature 340(6228): 11–14
8. Ecker UKH, Lewandowsky S, Swire B, Chang D, (2011) Correcting false information in memory: Manipulating the strength of misinformation encoding and its retraction. Political Behavior 18(3): 570–578
9. Ellison CG, Musick MA, (1995) Conservative protestantism and public opinion toward science. Review of Religious Research 36(3): 245–262
10. Etchegary H, Cappelli M, Potter B, Vloet M, Graham I, Walker M, (2010) Attitude and knowledge about genetics and genetic testing. Public Health Genomics 13(2): 80–88
11. Evans G, Durant J, (1999) The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain. Public Understanding of Science 4(1): 57–74
12. Feinstein N, (2010) Salvaging science literacy. Science Education 95(1): 168–185
13. Festinger L, (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press
14. Gauchat G, (2011) The cultural authority of science: Public trust and acceptance of organized science. Public Understanding of Science 20(6): 751–770
15. Hamilton LC, Stampone MD, (2013) Blowin’ in the wind: Short-term weather and belief in anthropogenic climate change. Weather, Climate, and Society 5(2): 112–119
16. Hamilton LC, Hartter J, Saito K, (2015) Trust in scientists on climate change and vaccines. SAGE Open. 5(3): 1–13
17. Hart PS, Nisbet EC, (2012) Boomerang effects in science communication: How motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Communication Research 39(6): 701–723
18. Hmielowski JD, Feldman L, Myers TA, Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, (2013) An attack on science? Media use, trust in scientists, and perceptions of global warming. Public Understanding of Science 23(7): 866–883. Available at: http://pus.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/0963662513480091
19. Hobson K, Niemeyer S, (2013) “What sceptics believe”: The effects of information and deliberation on climate change scepticism. Public Understanding of Science 22(4): 396–412
20. Inhofe J, (2012) The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future. Washington, DC: WND Books
21. Jones III JE, (ed.) (2005) Kitzmiller V. Dover Area School District. Harrisburg, PA: Federal District Court
22. Kahan DM, (2015) Climate-science communication and the measurement problem. Advances in Political Psychology 36(S1): 1–43. Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/pops.12244
23. Kahan DM, Peters Ellen, Wittlin M, Slovic P, Ouellette LL, Braman D, (2012) The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Climate Change 2(10): 732–735
24. Kahan DM, Jenkins-Smith H, Braman D, (2011) Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. Journal of Risk Research 14(2): 147–174
25. King G, Honake J, Joseph A, Scheve K, (2001) Analyzing incomplete political science data: An alternative algorithm for multiple imputation. American Political Science Review 95(1): 49–69
26. Kögel T, Prskawetz A, (2001) Agricultural productivity growth and escape from the malthusian trap – Springer. Journal of Economic Growth 6(4): 337–357
27. Kunda Z, (1990) The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108(3): 480–498
28. Lewandowsky S, Ecker UKH, Seifert CM, Schwarz N, Cook J, (2012a) Misinformation and its correction: Continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 13(3): 106–131
29. Lewandowsky S, Gignac GE, Oberauer K, (2013a) The role of conspiracist ideation and worldviews in predicting rejection of science. PLoS ONE 8(10): e75637
30. Lewandowsky S, Gignac GE, Vaughan S, (2012b) The pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science. Nature Climate Change 3(4): 399–404
31. Lewandowsky S, Oberauer K, Gignac GE, (2013b) NASA faked the moon landing—Therefore, (climate) science is a hoax: An anatomy of the motivated rejection of science. Psychological Science 24(5): 622–633
32. Lodge M, Taber CS, (2013) The Rationalizing Voter. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press
33. Malka A, Krosnick JA, Debell M, Pasek J, Schneider D, (2009) Featuring Skeptics in News Media Stories about Global Warming Reduces Public Beliefs in the Seriousness of Global Warming. Stanford, CA: Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University
34. Mead LS, Mates A, (2009) Why science standards are important to a strong science curriculum and how states measure up. Evolution: Education and Outreach 2(3): 359–371
35. Miller JD, (1983) Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus 112(2): 29–48
36. Miller JD, (1998) The measurement of civic scientific literacy. Public Understanding of Science 7(3): 203–223
37. Miller JD, (2004) Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: What we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science 13(3): 273–294
38. National Science Board (2014) Science and Engineering Indicators 2014. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation
39. Nisbet EC, Cooper KE, Garrett RK, (2015) The partisan brain: How dissonant science messages lead conservatives and liberals to (dis)trust science. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 658(1): 36–66
40. Nyhan B, Reifler J, (2010) When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior 32(2): 303–330
41. Nyhan B, Reifler J, Richey S, Freed GL, (2014) Effective messages in vaccine promotion: A randomized trial. Pediatrics 133(4): e835–e842
42. Osborne J, Simon S, Collins S, (2003) Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education 25(9): 1049–1079
43. Pasek J, (2016) When will nonprobability surveys mirror probability surveys? Considering types of inference and weighting strategies as criteria for correspondence. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 28(2): 269–291
44. Pasek J, (in press). Don’t trust the scientists! Rejecting the scientific consensus “conspiracy”. In: Uscinski J (ed.) Conspiracy Theories and the People Who Believe Them. New York, NY: Oxford University Press
45. Peytchev A, (2012) Multiple imputation for unit nonresponse and measurement error. Public Opinion Quarterly 76(2): 214–237
46. Redlawsk DP, Civettini AJW, Emmerson KM, (2010) The affective tipping point: Do motivated reasoners ever “get it”? Political Psychology 31(4): 563–593
47. Roberts MR, Reid G, Schroeder M, Norris SP, (2013) Causal or spurious? The relationship of knowledge and attitudes to trust in science and technology. Public Understanding of Science 22(5): 624–641
48. Roos JM, (2014) Measuring science or religion? A measurement analysis of the national science foundation sponsored science literacy scale 2006–2010. Public Understanding of Science 23(7): 797–813
49. Schuman H, Presser S, (1981) Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys. New York, NY: Academic Press
50. Sherkat DE, (2011) Religion and scientific literacy in the United States. Social Science Quarterly 92(5): 1134–1150
51. Singh GK, Yu SM, (1995) Infant mortality in the United States: Trends, differentials, and projections, 1950 through 2010. American Journal of Public Health 85(7): 957–964
52. Snow CE, Dibner KA, (eds) (2016) Science Literacy: Concepts, Contexts, and Consequences. Washington, DC: National Academies Press
53. Solomon J, (1993) Reception and rejection of science knowledge: Choice, style and home culture. Public Understanding of Science 2(2): 111–121
54. Standage T, (2014) The Victorian Internet. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Publishing
55. Stocklmayer SM, Bryant C, (2011) Science and the public—What should people know? International Journal of Science Education, Part B 2(1): 81–101
56. Sturgis P, Allum N, (2004) Science in society: Re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understanding of Science 13(1): 55–74
57. Van Der Linden SL, Leiserowitz AA, Feinberg GD, Maibach EW, (2015) The scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: Experimental evidence. PLoS ONE 10(2). Available at: http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118489
58. Weingart P, (1999) Scientific expertise and political accountability: Paradoxes of science in politics. Science and Public Policy 26(3): 151–161
59. Withey SB, (1959) Public opinion about science and scientists. Public Opinion Quarterly 23(3): 382
60. Yeager DS, Krosnick JA, Chang L, Javitz HS, Levendusky MS, Simpser A, (2011) Comparing the accuracy of RDD telephone surveys and Internet surveys conducted with probability and non-probability samples. Public Opinion Quarterly 75(4): 709–747. Available at: http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/doi/10.1093/poq/nfr020