This paper investigates the influence of ideology on trust in scientists. We assume that during a pandemic, ideology is linked to levels of trust in scientists such that those espousing left- (vs. right-) wing beliefs trust the scientific profession more. We posit that the negative perception of scientists, a feature of right-wing narratives in the country of study, underlies this effect. Additionally, we argue that ideology has an indirect impact, via levels of trust in scientists, on beliefs and attitudes towards vaccines and vaccine policy. To test these hypotheses, we conducted three studies (N = 1,155): one prepandemic study and two studies during a pandemic. The results confirmed the hypotheses; however, we observed varied effects at the outset of the pandemic versus later stages. The findings contribute to the ongoing discussion around the ideological underpinnings of trust in scientists and carry implications for public health measures.
BaumgaertnerB.CarlisleJ. E.JustwanF. (2018). The influence of political ideology and trust on willingness to vaccinate. PLoS ONE, 13, Article e0191728. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0191728
3.
BehrendT. S.SharekD. J.MeadeA. W.WiebeE. N. (2011). The viability of crowdsourcing for survey research. Behavioral Research Methods, 43, Article 800. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0081-0
4.
CampbellT. H.KayA. C. (2014). Solution aversion: On the relation between ideology and motivated disbelief. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 809–824. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037963
5.
Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej. (2017). Polacy o obowiązku szczepienia dzieci. Kominikat z badań nr 100/2017 [Poles on the obligation to vaccinate children. Report no 100/2017]. https://www.cbos.pl/SPISKOM.POL/2017/K_100_17.PDF
6.
ChandlerJ.MuellerP.PaolacciG. (2014). Nonnaïveté among Amazon Mechanical Turk workers: Consequences and solutions for behavioral researchers. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 112–130. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0365-7
7.
CheonB. K.MelaniI.HongY. (2020). How USA-centric is psychology? An archival study of implicit assumptions of generalizability of findings to human nature based on origins of study samples. Social Psychological and Personality Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620927269
8.
ChryssochoidisG.StradaA.KrystallisA. (2009). Public trust in institutions and information sources regarding risk management and communication: Towards integrating extant knowledge. Journal of Risk Research, 12, 137–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870802637000
9.
CofnasN.CarlN.Woodley of MenieM. A. (2018). Does activism in social science explain conservatives’ distrust of scientists?American Journal of Sociology, 49, 135–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-017-9362-0
10.
ColquittJ. A.ScottB. A.LePineJ. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909–927. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.909
11.
CrawfordJ. T.BrandtM. J.InbarY.ChambersJ. R.MotylM. (2017). Social and economic ideologies differentially predict prejudice across the political spectrum, but social issues are most divisive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 383–412. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000074
CzarnekG.KossowskaM.SzwedP. (2020b). Political ideology and attitudes towards vaccination: Study report. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/uwehk
15.
CzarnekG.SzwedP.KossowskaM. (2019). Right- and left-wing prejudice toward dissimilar groups in cultural and economic domains. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 807–823. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2548
16.
De FigueiredoA.JohnstonI. G.SmithD. M. D.AgarwalS.LarsonH. J.JonesN. S. (2016). Forecasted trends in vaccination coverage and correlations with socioeconomic factors: A global time-series analysis over 30 years. The Lancet Global Health, 4, e726–e735. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(16)30167-X
17.
DolińskiD.DolińskaB.Zmaczyńska-WitekB.BanachM.KuleszaW. (2020). Unrealistic optimism in the time of coronavirus pandemic: May it help to kill, if so—whom: Disease or the person?Journal of Clinical Medicine, 9, Article 1464. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9051464
GangarosaE. J.GalazkaA. M.WolfeC. R.PhillipsL. M.MillerE.ChenR. T.GangarosaR. E. (1998). Impact of anti-vaccine movements on pertussis control: The untold story. The Lancet, 351, 356–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(97)04334-1
23.
HartP. S.NisbetE. C. (2012). Boomerang effects in science communication: How motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Communication Research, 39, 701–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211416646
24.
HayesA. (2013). Methodology in the social sciences. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
25.
HibbingJ.SmithK.AlfordJ. (2014). Negativity bias and political preferences: A response to commentators. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37, 333–350. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X1300280X
26.
HmielowskiJ. D.FeldmanL.MyersT. A.LeiserowitzA.MaibachE. (2014). An attack on science? Media use, trust in scientists, and perceptions of global warming. Public Understanding of Science, 23, 866–883. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513480091
27.
HornseyM.HarrisJ.FieldingK. (2018). The psychological roots of anti-vaccination attitudes: A 24-nation investigation. Health Psychology, 37, 307–315. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000586
28.
HussainA.AliS.AhmedM.HussainS. (2018). The anti-vaccination movement: A regression in modern medicine. Cureus, 10, Article e2919. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.2919
29.
ImhoffR.LambertyP. (2020). A bioweapon or a hoax? The link between distinct conspiracy beliefs about the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak and pandemic behavior. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11, 1110–1118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620934692
KahanD. (2017). Misconceptions, misinformation, and the logic of identity-protective cognition (Cultural Cognition Project Working Paper Series No. 164, Yale Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 605, Yale Law & Economics Research Paper No. 575). SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2973067
35.
KellstedtP. M.ZahranS.VedlitzA. (2008). Personal efficacy, the information environment, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk Analysis, 28, 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01010.x
KossowskaM.SzwedP.CzarnekG. (2020). Trust in scientists and attitudes towards vaccines and vaccine policy: The role of perception of scientists as elitists. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/xzj9f
38.
KulasP. (2018) Antyelitarna narracja współczesnej polskiej prawicy [The anti-elite narrative of the contemporary Polish right-wing]. Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej [Qualitative Sociology Review], 14, 14–39.
39.
LeiserowitzA.MaibachE.Roser-RenoufC. (2010). Climate change in the American mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs and attitudes in January 2010. Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change. http://environment.yale.edu/uploads/AmericansGlobalWarmingBeliefs2010.pdf
40.
LewandowskyS.GignacG. E.OberauerK. (2013). The role of conspiracist ideation and worldviews in predicting rejection of science. PLoS ONE8(10): e75637. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0075637
41.
MalkaA.LelkesY.SotoC. (2019). Are cultural and economic conservatism positively correlated? A large-scale cross-national test. British Journal of Political Science, 49, 1045–1069. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000072
42.
MalkaA.SotoC. J.InzlichtM.LelkesY. (2014). Do needs for security and certainty predict cultural and economic conservatism? A cross-national analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 1031–1051. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036170
43.
McCrightA.DentzmanK.ChartersM.DietzT. (2013). The influence of political ideology on trust in science. Environmental Research Letters, 8, Article 044029.
44.
MichalskiC. (2018). Liberałowie kontra populiści [Liberals verus populists]. Newsweek Polska [Newsweek Poland], 31, 48–50.
45.
PlohlN.MusilB. (2020). Modeling compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines: The critical role of trust in science. Psychology, Health & Medicine. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2020.1772988
46.
RutjensB. T.HeineS. J.SuttonR. M.van HarreveldF. (2018). Attitudes towards science. In OlsonE. S. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology (Vol. 57, pp. 125–165). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2017.08.001
47.
RutjensB. T.SuttonR. M.van der LeeR. (2018). Not all skepticism is equal: Exploring the ideological antecedents of science acceptance and rejection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44, 384–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217741314
SibleyC. G.GreavesL. M.SatherleyN.WilsonM. S.OverallN. C.LeeC. H. J.MilojevP.BulbuliaJ.OsborneD.MilfontT. L.HoukamauC. A.DuckI. M.Vickers-JonesR.BarlowF. K. (2020). Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide lockdown on trust, attitudes toward government, and well-being. American Psychologist, 75, 618–630. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000662
50.
SiegristM.CvetkovichG. T. (2000). Perception of hazards: The role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Analysis, 20, 713–720. https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.205064
51.
TaylorS. (2019). The psychology of pandemics. Preparing for the next global outbreak of infectious disease. Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
52.
Van BavelJ. J.PereiraA. (2018). The partisan brain: An identity-based model of political belief. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22, 213–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.01.004
53.
Van HarreveldF.RutjensB. T. (2020). The impact of threat to personal control on trust in experts and non-experts communicating about risk. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8nq47
54.
WallingaJ.Levy-BruhlD.GayN.WachmannC. (2001). Estimation of measles reproduction ratios and prospects for elimination of measles by vaccination in some Western European countries. Epidemiology and Infection, 127, 281–295. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095026880100601X
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.
