Scientific authority in policy contexts: Public attitudes about environmental scientists, medical researchers, and economists
Abstract
This paper uses data from the US General Social Survey to examine public support for scientists in policy contexts and its link to scientific disciplines. An analysis of attitudes about the amount of influence that environmental scientists, two kinds of medical researchers, and economists should have over policy decisions reveals that in each discipline the extent to which scientists are thought to serve the nation’s best interests is the strongest determinant of attitudes about scientists as policy advisors. Perceptions of scientists’ technical knowledge and the level of consensus in the scientific community also have direct, albeit weaker effects on opinions about scientists’ appropriate roles in policy settings. Whereas previous research has stressed the importance of local variability in understanding the transfer of scientific authority across institutional boundaries, these results point to considerable homogeneity in the social bases of scientific authority in policy contexts.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
Allison P (1999) Comparing logit and probit coefficients across groups. Sociological Methods and Research 28: 186–208.
Bak H-J (2001) Education and public attitudes toward science: Implications for the “deficit model” of education and support for science and technology. Social Science Quarterly 82: 779–795.
Barben D (2010) Analyzing acceptance politics: Towards an epistemological shift in the public understanding of science and technology. Public Understanding of Science 19: 274–292.
Bauer M, Petkova K, Boyadijieva P (2000) Public knowledge of and attitudes to science: Alternative measures that may end the “science war”. Science, Technology and Human Values 25: 30–51.
Bourdieu P (1975) The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason. Social Science Information 14: 19–47.
Brooks C, Manza J (2007) Why Welfare States Persist: The Importance of Public Opinion and Democracies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Brown T (2009) Imperfect Oracle: The Epistemic and Moral Authority of Science. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Burstein P (2003) The impact of public opinion on public policy: A review and an agenda. Political Research Quarterly 56: 29–40.
Callon M (1999) Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay. In: Biagioli M (ed.) The Science Studies Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 67–83.
Cambrosio A, Keating P (1983) The disciplinary stake: The case of chronobiology. Social Studies of Science 13: 323–353.
Clarke A (1998) Disciplining Reproduction: Modernity, American Life Science and the Problems of Sex. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Crane D (1972) Invisible Colleges: Diffusion of Knowledge in Scientific Communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Daston L (1992) Objectivity and the escape from perspective. Social Studies of Science 22: 597–618.
Douglas H (2009) Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal. Pittsburg, PA: University of Pittsburg Press.
Drori G, Meyer J, Ramirez F, Schofer E (2003) Science in the Modern World Polity: Institutionalization and Globalization. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
Epstein S (1998) Impure Science: Aids, Activism and the Politics of Knowledge. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Epstein S (2007) Inclusion: The Politics of Difference in Medical Science. Chicago: University of University Press.
European Commission (2010) Science and Technology Report. Special Eurobarometer 340 / Wave 73.1-TNS Opinion and Social.
Evans G, Durant J (1995) The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain. Public Understanding of Science 4: 57–74.
Ezrahi Y (2004) Science and political imagination in contemporary democracies. In: Jasanoff S (ed.) States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order. London: Routledge, pp. 254–273.
Fourcade M (2009) Economists and Societies: Discipline and Profession in the United States, Britain, and France, 1890s to 1990s. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Frickel S, Moore K (2006) Prospects and challenges for a new political sociology of science. In: Frickel S, Moore K (eds) The New Political Sociology of Science: Institutions, Networks, and Power. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, pp. 3–31.
Gaskell G, Einsiedel E, Hallman W, Priest SH, Jackson J, Olsthoorn J (2005) Social values and the governance of science. Science 310: 1908–1909.
Gauchat G (2011) The cultural authority of science: Public trust and acceptance of organized science. Public Understanding of Science 20: 751–770.
Gieryn TF (1983) Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in the professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review 48: 781–795.
Gieryn TF (1999) Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Guston DH, Keniston K (eds) (1994) The Fragile Contract: University Scientists and the Federal Government. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Haraway D (1991) Simians, Cyborgs, and Women. London: Free Association Press.
Hargens L (1975) Patterns of Scientific Research: A Comparative Analysis of Research Work in Three Scientific Fields. ASA Rose Monograph Series, Washington, DC.
Hilgartner S (2000) Science on Stage: Expert Advice as Public Drama. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
Jasanoff S (1994) The Fifth Branch: Scientists as Policy Makers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Jasanoff S (2005) Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kagan J (2009) The Three Cultures: Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, and the Humanities in the 21st Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kennedy J, Powell B, Long JS, O’Brien TL, Meanwell E, Dodson K, Noy S (2011) Examining the Science and Technology Items in the General Social Survey. Unpublished report to the National Science Foundation.
Knorr K (1981) Social and scientific method, or what do we make of the distinction between natural and social sciences? The Philosophy of Science 11: 335–360.
Knorr-Cetina K (1999) Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kuhn T ([1962] 1996) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 3rd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lacey H (2005) Values and Objectivity in Science: The Current Controversy about Transgenic Crops. London: Routledge.
Latour B (1987) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists through Society. London: SAGE.
Long JS (2009) Group comparisons in logit and probit using predicted probabilities. Working paper. Available at: http://www.indiana.edu/~jslsoc/files_research/groupdif/groupwithprobabilities/groups-with-prob-2009-06-25.pdf (accessed December 2011).
Lujan JL, Todt O (2007) Precaution in public: The social perception of the role of science and values in policy making. Public Understanding of Science 16: 97–109.
Merton R ([1942] 1973) The normative structure of science. In: Storer N (ed.) The Sociology of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 267–280.
Miller J (1983) Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus 112: 29–48.
Miller J (2004) Public understanding of and attitudes toward scientific research: What we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science 13: 273–294.
National Science Board (2008) Science and Engineering Indicators, 2008. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
Nelkin D (1975) The political impact of technical expertise. Social Studies of Science 5: 35–54.
Nowotny H (2005) High- and low-cost realities for science and society. Science 308: 1117–1118.
Schweber L (2006) Disciplining Statistics: Demography and Vital Statistics in France and England, 1830– 1885. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Shackley S, Wynne B (1996) Representing uncertainty in global climate change science and policy: Boundary-ordering devices and authority. Science, Technology and Human Values 21: 275–302.
Shapin S (2008) Science in the modern world. In: Hackett EJ, Amersterdamska O, Lynch M, Wajcman J (eds) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 433–448.
Singer J, Willett J (2002) Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis: Modeling Change and Event Occurrences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Smith TW, Marsden PV, Hout M, Kim J (2011) General social surveys, 1972–2010 [machine-readable data file]/Principal Investigator, Smith TW; Co-Principal Investigator, Marsden PV; Co-Principal Investigator, Hout M; Sponsored by National Science Foundation. NORC ed. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center [producer]; Storrs, CT: The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, University of Connecticut [distributor].
Thorpe C (2002) Disciplining experts: Scientific authority and liberal democracy in the Oppenheimer case. Social Studies of Science 32: 525–562.
Wooldridge JM (2002) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Yankelovich D (2003) Winning greater influence for science. Issues in Science and Technology Summer: 7–11.
Yearley S (2000) Making systematic sense of public discontents with expert knowledge: Two analytical approaches and a case study. Public Understanding of Science 9: 105–122.
Zehr S (2000) Public representations of scientific uncertainty about global climate change. Public Understanding of Science 9: 85–103.
Biographies
Timothy L. O’Brien is a PhD candidate in the Department of Sociology at Indiana University. His research focuses on scientific careers as well as the ways in which scientific authority is negotiated outside of science’s traditional domain.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: February 22, 2012
Issue published: October 2013
Keywords
PubMed: 24048622
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in Public Understanding of Science.
VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICSArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 630
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 27 view articles Opens in new tab
Crossref: 0
-
The Effect of Trust in Science and Media Use on Public Belief in Anthr...
-
Chapter 8. “The job requires considerable expertise”
-
Public perception of scientists: Experimental evidence on the role of ...
-
From populism to climate scepticism: the role of institutional trust a...
-
Scientific Disciplines and the Admissibility of Expert Evidence in Cou...
-
Environmental risk in an age of biotic impoverishment
-
Who Might Buy a Gun? Results from the Guns in American Life Survey
-
Effects of Competing Statistical and Testimonial Evidence in Debates A...
-
Political beliefs, views about technocracy, and energy and climate pol...
-
Turning the Gaze on Ourselves: Public Communication of Sociology
-
The Role of Scientific Source Credibility and Goodwill in Public Skept...
-
Decision‐Making in Local Context: Expertise, Experience, and the Impor...
-
Trust and distrust in relation to food risks in Spain: An approach to ...
-
Public responses to scientific research: Does disciplinary attribution...
-
Evaluating Epistemic Commitments and Science Communication Practice in...
-
The Cultural-Cognitive Mapping of Scientific Professions
-
Gender and support for expert advisers and elected officials in the US...
-
The legitimacy of environmental scientists in the public sphere
-
Dividing and Uniting Through Naming: The Case of North Carolina's Sea-...
-
Discourses on the Toxic Effects of Internal Chemical Contamination in ...
-
Going Public, Gaining Credibility...
-
In science communication, why does the idea of the public deficit alwa...
-
A critical evaluation of science outreach via social media: its role a...
-
A critical evaluation of science outreach via social media: its role a...
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Get access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
