University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Wissenschaft im Dialog, Germany.
Public Underst Sci. 2021 Jan;30(1):91-102. doi: 10.1177/0963662520954370. Epub 2020 Sep 14.
Several meta-analytical attempts to reproduce results of empirical research have failed in recent years, prompting scholars and news media to diagnose a "replication crisis" and voice concerns about science losing public credibility. Others, in contrast, hoped replication efforts could improve public confidence in science. Yet nationally representative evidence backing these concerns or hopes is scarce. We provide such evidence, conducting a secondary analysis of the German "Science Barometer" ("Wissenschaftsbarometer") survey. We find that most Germans are not aware of the "replication crisis." In addition, most interpret replication efforts as indicative of scientific quality control and science's self-correcting nature. However, supporters of the populist right-wing party AfD tend to believe that the "crisis" shows one cannot trust science, perhaps using it as an argument to discredit science. But for the majority of Germans, hopes about reputational benefits of the "replication crisis" for science seem more justified than concerns about detrimental effects.
近年来，多次试图复制实证研究结果的元分析都以失败告终，这促使学者和新闻媒体将其诊断为“复制危机”，并对科学丧失公众信任表示担忧。相比之下，另一些人则希望复制工作能够提高公众对科学的信心。然而，支持这些担忧或希望的全国代表性证据却很少。我们提供了这样的证据，对德国“科学晴雨表”（“Wissenschaftsbarometer”）调查进行了二次分析。我们发现，大多数德国人并不了解“复制危机”。此外，大多数人将复制工作解释为科学质量控制和科学自我修正性质的标志。然而，民粹主义右翼政党 AfD 的支持者往往认为，这场“危机”表明人们不能相信科学，他们可能以此作为诋毁科学的论据。但对于大多数德国人来说，对科学因“复制危机”而获得声誉的好处的期望似乎比对其不利影响的担忧更有根据。
