Confidence in science is high. With this recent conclusion from the Rathenau Institute, outgoing minister Ingrid Engelshoven (Education, Culture and Science, D66) opened her speech during the presentation of the Spinoza and Stevin Prizes. “Rightly,” she said. “And hopeful news.”
With this she supported those scientists for whom threats and intimidation are the order of the day. “Everyone in this country benefits from Dutch science all day long, and from the hard work of all our scientists.” And that’s why we need to ensure that science continues to thrive. And that academic freedom and security are guaranteed. An important message, but it had almost escaped me.
The methodologist in me was distracted by the opening sentence. I wondered what it means that the Dutch have confidence in science? What do they mean by ‘science’ and what exactly do they have faith in? And how do you ‘measure’ the degree of trust in a survey? Ask one question, like how much faith do you have in science? Or do you combine questions about trust in all kinds of aspects of science, such as quality, usefulness, and knowledge and skills of scientists, into one answer?
Why did I wonder? Because the high level of trust seems to be at odds with the mediocre research quality that methodologists and statisticians have pointed out for decades. Because it clashes with the fact that much research can hardly be reproduced and that perverse incentives such as publication pressure have been undermining the quality of studies for years. That is also the reality of science, but apparently that plays no role in the image formation and thus in trust. So what does trust mean?
Abstract
Since 2012, the Rathenau Institute has been surveying trust in institutions such as science, the judiciary, media, politics and business every three years. The recent survey was completed by a representative sample of about 1,500 respondents. Trust was established with just one question, to be answered with a number from 1 to 10: “Can you indicate whether or not you trust the institutions below?”
As in previous years, science enjoys the highest level of confidence, this time with an average rating of 7.4. In the first report from 2012, the researchers made a critical comment on the meaning of this positive rating: “The question measures trust in science in the abstract or as an institution or ideal.” In other words: it is not really about scientific practice, nor about the reliability or quality of the research.
This is confirmed in the new report. The researchers write that the term science is broad and can be interpreted in various ways. They had therefore asked the participants what they think of ‘science’. And indeed: they mainly think of positive and neutral concepts such as research, knowledge, progress, development and university. All very abstract. They have faith in that. Only a few percent mention negative aspects such as fraud, plagiarism and conflicts of interest of research funders.
In an abstract sense, the Dutch have faith in science. When it becomes more concrete, they make a distinction. For example, the report shows that they have a lot of confidence in research into the treatment of cancer and the causes of dementia, but least in the effectiveness of face masks in the case of corona. The conflicting reports about the mouth caps may play a role in this, the researchers write, but the wish is also the father of the thought. People are more likely to trust research if it aligns with their own values and views. They want medical breakthroughs, but see nothing in the introduction of face masks.
Trust in everything
Trust in science is not only abstract, it also seems to be mainly about trust in the institutions in general. According to the first report, the figures reflect a ‘diffuse attitude towards institutions’ that is influenced by ‘general attitudes’. For example, it appears that GroenLinks and D66 voters have significantly more confidence in the institutions than PVV, FvD and SGP voters. And that highly educated people or people with a higher social position are also more positive.
The figures also suggest that the trust seems to be about institutions in general. “The confidence of the Dutch in science is rising,” headlines the Rathenau Instituut’s website, but that applied to all institutions. The figure for science rose by 0.3, as did those for the trade unions and the House of Representatives. Confidence in the government and the judiciary was even 0.5 higher.
And the cause for the increase does not seem specific either. It is attributed to the crisis, but not the corona crisis in particular. “Institutional and political trust also rises in other crises, such as a terrorist attack or air disaster.”
Confidence in science is high. And risen. For what it’s worth.
Cecile Janssens is professor of translational epidemiology at Emory University in Atlanta.
A version of this article also appeared in NRC Handelsblad of 23 October 2021
A version of this article also appeared in NRC in the morning of October 23, 2021
#confidence #science