Wolff Sarah M, Breakwell Glynis M, Wright Daniel B
Educational Psychology, Leadership, and Higher Education, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
R Soc Open Sci. 2024 Apr 17;11(4):231228. doi: 10.1098/rsos.231228. eCollection 2024 Apr.
Reliable and valid measurement of trust in science and scientists is important. Assessing levels of such trust is important in determining attitudes and predicting behaviours in response to medical and scientific interventions targeted at managing public crises. However, trust is a complex phenomenon that has to be understood in relation to both distrust and mistrust. The Trust in Science and Scientists Scale has been adopted with increasing frequency in large-scale public health research. Detailed psychometric evaluation of the scale is overdue and makes meaningful comparisons between studies that use the scale difficult. Here, we examine the scale's dimensionality across five separate samples. We find that two factors emerge that are divided by their item polarity. Implications for scale use and trust in science measurement are discussed.
可靠且有效的对科学及科学家信任度的测量很重要。评估这种信任水平对于确定态度以及预测针对管理公共危机的医学和科学干预措施所产生的行为很重要。然而，信任是一种复杂的现象，必须结合不信任和猜疑来理解。《科学与科学家信任量表》在大规模公共卫生研究中的使用频率越来越高。对该量表进行详细的心理测量学评估早就该进行了，这使得使用该量表的研究之间难以进行有意义的比较。在此，我们在五个独立样本中检验了该量表的维度。我们发现出现了两个因素，它们按项目极性划分。讨论了该量表使用及科学信任度测量的相关影响。
