While most Americans recognize the importance of funding scientific research, many are satisfied with status quo funding, and only a minority see a need for increased federal support. This poses a potential challenge to scientists’ abilities to address complex policy problems, like climate change. Previous correlational research suggests that public opposition to science funding is (at least in part) the result of low levels of knowledge about the basics of science. Leveraging panel data from two nationally representative studies (2008–2014), I show that people who become more interested in science over time but not those who become more knowledgable are more likely to favor increasing public support for scientific research. These results hold when controlling for other known correlates of science funding attitudes (e.g. political ideology, religiosity). I conclude by discussing the potential benefits of prioritizing science communication and science education efforts to increase public science interest.
AllumNSturgisPTabouraziDBrunton-SmithI (2008) Science knowledge and attitudes across cultures: A meta-analysis. Public Understanding of Science17(1): 35–54.
4.
BesleyJDudoA (2017) Scientists’ views about public engagement and science communication in the context of climate change. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. Epub ahead of print April. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.380.
5.
BesleyJC (2016) The National Science Foundation’s science and technology survey and support for science funding, 2006–2014. Public Understanding of Science27: 94–109.
6.
BesleyJCDudoADYuanSGhannmanNA (2016) Qualitative interviews with science communication trainers about communication objectives and goals. Science Communication38(3): 356–381.
7.
BrossardDScheufeleDAKimELewensteinBV (2009) Religiosity as a perceptual filter: Examining processes of opinion formation about nanotechnology. Public Understanding of Science18(5): 546–558.
8.
BurnhamJC (1987) How Superstition Won and Science Lost: Popularizing Science and Health in the United States. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
9.
DickersonAHoleARMunfordL (2011) A review of estimators for the fixed-effects ordered logit model. United Kingdom Stata Users Group Meetings. Available at: http://repec.org/usug2011/UK11_Hole.pdf
10.
DudoABesleyJC (2016) Scientists prioritization of communication objectives for public engagement. PLoS ONE11(2): e0148867.
11.
EvansGDurantJ (1995) The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain. Public Understanding of Science4(1): 57–74.
12.
GauchatG (2011) The cultural authority of science: Public trust and acceptance of organized science. Public Understanding of Science20(6): 751–770.
13.
GauchatG (2012) Politicization of science in the public sphere: A study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. American Sociological Review77(2): 167–187.
14.
GauchatG (2015) The political context of science in the united states: Public acceptance of evidence-based policy and science funding. Social Forces94(2): 723–746.
15.
HallmanWK (2017) What the public thinks and knows about science and why it matters. In: JamiesonKHKahanDScheufeleDA (eds) The Oxford Handbook of the Science of Science Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 61–72.
16.
HoSSScheufeleDACorleyEA (2011) Value predispositions, mass media, and attitudes toward nanotechnology: The interplay of public and experts. Science Communication33(2): 167–200.
KahanDM (2016b) On the sources of ordinary science knowledge and extraordinary science ignorance. In: JamiesonKHKahanDScheufeleDA (eds) The Oxford Handbook of the Science of Science Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 35–50.
20.
KahanDM (2017) ‘Ordinary science intelligence’: A science-comprehension measure for study of risk and science communication, with notes on evolution and climate change. Journal of Risk Research20(8): 995–1016.
21.
KahanDMLandrumACarpenterKHelftLJamiesonKH (2017) Science curiosity and political information processing. Advances in Political Psychology38(S1): 179–199.
22.
KahanDMPetersEWittlinMSlovictPOuelletteLLBramanDet al. (2012) The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Climate Change2(10): 732–735.
LubchencoJ (1998) Entering the century of the environment: A new social contract for science. Science279(5350): 491–497.
25.
LupiaA (2016) Uninformed: Why People Know So Little about Politics and What We Can Do about It. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26.
MeadRHejmadiMHurstLD (2018) Scientific aptitude better explains poor responses to teaching of evolution than psychological conflicts. Nature Ecology & Evolution2: 388–394.
27.
MillerJD (1983) Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus112: 29–48.
28.
MillerJD (1998) The measurement of civic scientific literacy. Public Understanding of Science7: 203–223.
29.
MondakJJ (2001) Developing valid knowledge scales. American Journal of Political Science45: 224–238.
30.
MorelloL (2013) More cuts loom for us science: Stalemate in congress puts spending plans on hold. Nature501(7466): 147–149.
31.
MottaM (2018a) The dynamics and political implications of anti-intellectualism in the United States. American Politics Research46(3): 465–498.
32.
MottaM (2018b) The enduring effect of scientific interest on trust in climate scientists in the United States. Nature Climate Change8: 485–488.
33.
MummoloJPetersonE (2018) Improving the interpretation of fixed effects regression results. Political Science Research and Methods. Epub ahead of print 11 January. DOI: 10.1017/psrm.2017.44.
34.
MuñozAMorenoCLujánJL (2012) Who is willing to pay for science? On the relationship between public perception of science and the attitude to public funding of science. Public Understanding of Science21(2): 242–253.
35.
National Science Foundation (NSF) (2006) Science and Engineering Indicators, vol. 1. Alexandria, VA: NSF; National Science Board.
36.
National Science Foundation (NSF) (2014) Science and Engineering Indicators, vol. 1. Alexandria, VA: NSF; National Science Board.
37.
NicholsT (2017) The Death of Expertise: The Campaign against Established Knowledge and Why It Matters. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38.
PasekJ (2017) Its not my consensus: Motivated reasoning and the sources of scientific illiteracy. Public Understanding of Science. Epub ahead of print 23 September. DOI: 10.1177/0963662517733681.
39.
SimpsonRDOliverJS (1990) A summary of major influences on attitude toward and achievement in science among adolescent students. Science Education74(1): 1–18.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
