• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

科学实用性和科学信任度的关联,以及它们与对科学运作方式的认识的关系。

Science-utility and science-trust associations and how they relate to knowledge about how science works.

机构信息

Department of Educational Research, University of Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany.

Department of Personality Psychology and Psychological Assessment, University of Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2021 Dec 16;16(12):e0260586. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260586. eCollection 2021.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0260586
PMID:34914732
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8675735/
Abstract

Knowledge about how science works, trust in scientists, and the perceived utility of science currently appear to be eroding in these times in which "alternative facts" or personal experiences and opinions are used as arguments. Yet, in many situations, it would be beneficial for the individual and all of society if scientific findings were considered in decision-making. For this to happen, people have to trust in scientists and perceive science as useful. Still, in university contexts, it might not be desirable to report negative beliefs about science. In addition, science-utility and science-trust associations may differ from explicit beliefs because associations were learned through the co-occurrence of stimuli rather than being based on propositional reasoning. We developed two IATs to measure science-utility and science-trust associations in university students and tested the psychometric properties and predictive potential of these measures. In a study of 261 university students, the IATs were found to have good psychometric properties and small correlations with their corresponding self-report scales. Science-utility and science-trust associations predicted knowledge about how science works over and above self-reported beliefs. The results suggest that indirect measures are useful for assessing beliefs about science and can be used to predict outcome measures.

摘要

关于科学运作方式的知识、对科学家的信任以及科学的感知实用性,在当前这个“替代事实”或个人经历和观点被用作论据的时代,似乎正在被削弱。然而,在许多情况下,如果在决策中考虑科学发现,将对个人和整个社会都有益。要做到这一点,人们必须信任科学家,并认为科学是有用的。尽管如此,在大学环境中,报告对科学的负面看法可能并不是人们所期望的。此外,科学实用性和科学信任的关联可能与明确的信念不同,因为关联是通过刺激的共同出现而习得的,而不是基于命题推理。我们开发了两个 IAT 来测量大学生的科学实用性和科学信任关联,并测试了这些测量方法的心理测量学特性和预测潜力。在一项对 261 名大学生的研究中,发现 IAT 具有良好的心理测量学特性,与相应的自我报告量表的相关性很小。科学实用性和科学信任关联可以预测对科学运作方式的了解,超过了自我报告的信念。结果表明,间接测量方法对于评估对科学的信念是有用的,并且可以用于预测结果测量。

相似文献

1
Science-utility and science-trust associations and how they relate to knowledge about how science works.科学实用性和科学信任度的关联,以及它们与对科学运作方式的认识的关系。
PLoS One. 2021 Dec 16;16(12):e0260586. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260586. eCollection 2021.
2
Deference and decision-making in science and society: How deference to scientific authority goes beyond confidence in science and scientists to become authoritarianism.科学与社会中的尊重与决策:科学权威的尊重如何超越对科学和科学家的信心,进而演变成威权主义。
Public Underst Sci. 2020 Nov;29(8):800-818. doi: 10.1177/0963662520962741. Epub 2020 Oct 8.
3
Do Open-Science Badges Increase Trust in Scientists Among Undergraduates, Scientists, and the Public?开放科学徽章是否能提高本科生、科学家和公众对科学家的信任?
Psychol Sci. 2022 Sep;33(9):1588-1604. doi: 10.1177/09567976221097499. Epub 2022 Aug 24.
4
Delineating between scientism and science enthusiasm: Challenges in measuring scientism and the development of novel scale.区分科学主义与科学热情:测量科学主义的挑战与新型量表的开发。
Public Underst Sci. 2024 Jul;33(5):568-586. doi: 10.1177/09636625231217900. Epub 2023 Dec 31.
5
Scale development: Chinese Irrational Beliefs and Rational Attitude Scale.量表编制:中国不合理信念与理性态度量表
Psych J. 2019 Mar;8(1):122-136. doi: 10.1002/pchj.249. Epub 2018 Oct 8.
6
College student mental health: An evaluation of the DSM-5 self-rated Level 1 cross-cutting symptom measure.大学生心理健康:DSM-5 自我评定 1 级跨切症状测量评估。
Psychol Assess. 2018 Oct;30(10):1382-1389. doi: 10.1037/pas0000628. Epub 2018 Aug 2.
7
Assessments of trust in intimate relationships and the self-perception process.对亲密关系中的信任及自我认知过程的评估。
J Soc Psychol. 1998 Apr;138(2):217-28. doi: 10.1080/00224549809600373.
8
Political Orientation and Belief in Science in a U.S. College Sample.美国大学生群体中的政治倾向与科学信仰。
Psychol Rep. 2020 Oct;123(5):1688-1702. doi: 10.1177/0033294119889583. Epub 2019 Nov 21.
9
Attitude, preparedness, and perceived self-efficacy in controlling COVID-19 pandemics and associated factors among university students during school reopening.在学校重新开放期间,大学生对控制 COVID-19 大流行的态度、准备情况和感知自我效能及其相关因素。
PLoS One. 2021 Sep 2;16(9):e0255121. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255121. eCollection 2021.
10
Implicit and explicit measures of alcohol and smoking cognitions.酒精与吸烟认知的内隐和外显测量
Psychol Addict Behav. 2006 Dec;20(4):436-44. doi: 10.1037/0893-164X.20.4.436.

引用本文的文献

1
Promoting positive beliefs toward research evidence: results from a utility-value intervention study with pre-service teachers.促进对研究证据的积极信念:一项针对职前教师的效用-价值干预研究的结果
Front Psychol. 2025 Aug 6;16:1391931. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1391931. eCollection 2025.
2
Why it is good to communicate the bad: understanding the influence of message framing in persuasive communication on consumer decision-making processes.为何传递坏消息是有益的:理解说服性沟通中的信息框架对消费者决策过程的影响。
Front Hum Neurosci. 2023 Sep 5;17:1085810. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2023.1085810. eCollection 2023.
3
Trust in science and scientists among university students, staff, and faculty of a large, diverse university in Los Angeles during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Trojan Pandemic Response Initiative.洛杉矶一所大型多元化大学的学生、教职员工在 COVID-19 大流行期间对科学和科学家的信任,特洛伊大流行应对倡议。
BMC Public Health. 2023 Mar 30;23(1):601. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15533-x.
4
Effects of context and discrepancy when reading multiple documents.阅读多篇文档时上下文及差异的影响。
Read Writ. 2023;36(5):1111-1143. doi: 10.1007/s11145-022-10321-2. Epub 2022 Jun 28.

本文引用的文献

1
Development of Math Attitudes and Math Self-Concepts: Gender Differences, Implicit-Explicit Dissociations, and Relations to Math Achievement.数学态度和数学自我概念的发展:性别差异、内隐-外显分离以及与数学成就的关系。
Child Dev. 2021 Sep;92(5):e940-e956. doi: 10.1111/cdev.13523. Epub 2021 Feb 19.
2
A Diffusion Model Approach for Understanding the Impact of 17 Interventions on the Race Implicit Association Test.扩散模型方法探究 17 种干预措施对内隐联想测验种族效应的影响
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2021 Sep;47(9):1374-1389. doi: 10.1177/0146167220974489. Epub 2020 Dec 3.
3
More Than (Single) Text Comprehension? - On University Students' Understanding of Multiple Documents.不仅仅是(单一)文本理解?——关于大学生对多篇文档的理解
Front Psychol. 2020 Oct 23;11:562450. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.562450. eCollection 2020.
4
Evidence against subliminal anchoring: Two close, highly powered, preregistered, and failed replication attempts.反对阈下锚定效应的证据:两项严谨、功效强大、预先注册但复制尝试失败的研究。
J Exp Soc Psychol. 2021 Jan;92:104066. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104066. Epub 2020 Oct 16.
5
Implicit? What Do You Mean? A Comprehensive Review of the Delusive Implicitness Construct in Attitude Research.内隐的?你的意思是什么?态度研究中虚幻的内隐结构的全面综述。
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2020 Aug;24(3):212-232. doi: 10.1177/1088868320911325. Epub 2020 Mar 20.
6
Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results.众包假设检验:揭示设计选择如何影响研究结果的透明度。
Psychol Bull. 2020 May;146(5):451-479. doi: 10.1037/bul0000220. Epub 2020 Jan 16.
7
Validating process variables of sourcing in an assessment of multiple document comprehension.评估多项文档理解时,对来源进行过程变量验证。
Br J Educ Psychol. 2019 Sep;89(3):524-537. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12278. Epub 2019 Apr 13.
8
Relationship between the Implicit Association Test and intergroup behavior: A meta-analysis.内隐联想测验与群际行为的关系:一项元分析。
Am Psychol. 2019 Jul-Aug;74(5):569-586. doi: 10.1037/amp0000364. Epub 2018 Dec 13.
9
Who is trustworthy? Predicting trustworthy intentions and behavior.谁是值得信赖的?预测值得信赖的意图和行为。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2018 Sep;115(3):468-494. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000136. Epub 2018 Jul 12.
10
Thanks coefficient alpha, we'll take it from here.谢谢克朗巴哈系数,接下来我们自己来。
Psychol Methods. 2018 Sep;23(3):412-433. doi: 10.1037/met0000144. Epub 2017 May 29.