Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210.
Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Jul 26;119(30):e2120755119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2120755119. Epub 2022 Jul 12.
From vaccination refusal to climate change denial, antiscience views are threatening humanity. When different individuals are provided with the same piece of scientific evidence, why do some accept whereas others dismiss it? Building on various emerging data and models that have explored the psychology of being antiscience, we specify four core bases of key principles driving antiscience attitudes. These principles are grounded in decades of research on attitudes, persuasion, social influence, social identity, and information processing. They apply across diverse domains of antiscience phenomena. Specifically, antiscience attitudes are more likely to emerge when a scientific message comes from sources perceived as lacking credibility; when the recipients embrace the social membership or identity of groups with antiscience attitudes; when the scientific message itself contradicts what recipients consider true, favorable, valuable, or moral; or when there is a mismatch between the delivery of the scientific message and the epistemic style of the recipient. Politics triggers or amplifies many principles across all four bases, making it a particularly potent force in antiscience attitudes. Guided by the key principles, we describe evidence-based counteractive strategies for increasing public acceptance of science.
从疫苗接种拒绝到气候变化否认,反科学观点正在威胁人类。当不同的人被提供相同的科学证据时,为什么有些人接受而有些人却拒绝呢?基于各种新兴的数据和模型,这些模型探讨了反科学的心理学,我们确定了驱动反科学态度的四个核心原则基础。这些原则基于数十年的态度、说服、社会影响、社会认同和信息处理研究。它们适用于反科学现象的不同领域。具体来说,当科学信息来自被认为缺乏可信度的来源时;当接收者接受具有反科学态度的群体的社会成员身份或身份时;当科学信息本身与接收者认为真实、有利、有价值或道德的内容相矛盾时;或者当科学信息的传递与接收者的认知风格不匹配时,就更有可能出现反科学态度。政治在所有四个基础上引发或放大了许多原则,使其成为反科学态度的一个特别强大的力量。在关键原则的指导下,我们描述了基于证据的对抗策略,以提高公众对科学的接受度。