Michigan State University, USA.
Public Underst Sci. 2023 Aug;32(6):709-726. doi: 10.1177/09636625231161302. Epub 2023 Apr 3.
This article analyzes three publicly available datasets focused on trust in science and scientists. It specifically seeks to understand what direct measures of trust (i.e. questions that directly ask respondents how much they trust scientists) assess in terms of discrete measures of trustworthiness (i.e. perceptions of scientists' ability, integrity, and benevolence). Underlying the analyses is a concern that direct measures of trust are a poor substitute for differentiating between discrete trustworthiness perceptions and behavioral trust in the form of a specific willingness to make oneself vulnerable. The research concludes that it is unclear what direct trust measures are capturing in any given context and suggests that researchers should better use trust-related theory when designing surveys and trust-focused campaigns. The secondary data used come from the General Social Survey, Gallup, and the Pew Research Center.
本文分析了三个公开的数据集,这些数据集主要关注公众对科学和科学家的信任。本文特别试图了解直接信任测量(即直接询问受访者对科学家的信任程度的问题)在可区分的可信度测量方面评估了哪些内容(即对科学家能力、正直和善意的看法)。这些分析的基础是一个担忧,即直接的信任测量是区分离散的可信度感知和具体的愿意使自己处于脆弱状态的行为信任的一种糟糕的替代方法。研究结论表明,在任何特定情况下,直接信任测量都不清楚其测量的内容,并建议研究人员在设计调查和以信任为重点的活动时,应更好地利用与信任相关的理论。所使用的二手数据来自综合社会调查、盖洛普和皮尤研究中心。