The impacts of expertise, conflict, and scientific literacy on trust and belief in scientific disagreements
Abstract Media portrayals of scientific disagreements can blur distinctions between experts and non-experts, or include disagreements from vested individuals, potentially undermining trust in science and belief in scientific claims. We investigated how disagreeing sources’ expertise and conflicting...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2025-04-01
|
| Series: | Scientific Reports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-96333-8 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849737783154835456 |
|---|---|
| author | Natasha van Antwerpen Estelle B. Green Daniel Sturman Rachel A. Searston |
| author_facet | Natasha van Antwerpen Estelle B. Green Daniel Sturman Rachel A. Searston |
| author_sort | Natasha van Antwerpen |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Media portrayals of scientific disagreements can blur distinctions between experts and non-experts, or include disagreements from vested individuals, potentially undermining trust in science and belief in scientific claims. We investigated how disagreeing sources’ expertise and conflicting interests impact trust in scientific experts and belief in their claims, and whether scientific literacy moderates these effects. Across three, 2 × 2 factorial experiments with a student (N = 105) online (N = 110), and general Australian sample (N = 105), participants read articles describing a scientific claim followed by a disagreeing source whose subject-matter expertise (present/absent) and vested interest (present/absent) were manipulated. Participants in all samples judged the original scientific expert as more trustworthy and their claims more believable when the disagreeing source lacked relevant subject-matter expertise. Among student participants, conflicts of interest also impacted belief in scientific claims (but not trust in the scientist), and scientific literacy enhanced sensitivity to expertise and conflict, however, the other samples were largely insensitive to vested interests, and scientific literacy had varied effects in these samples. Our results show disagreement in the news, even from questionable sources, can sway evaluations of scientific claims and scientists, and highlight the value of literacy-based interventions in science communication. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-e81f2f683d64455fb06023bf253b17f1 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2045-2322 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-04-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Scientific Reports |
| spelling | doaj-art-e81f2f683d64455fb06023bf253b17f12025-08-20T03:06:49ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222025-04-0115111610.1038/s41598-025-96333-8The impacts of expertise, conflict, and scientific literacy on trust and belief in scientific disagreementsNatasha van Antwerpen0Estelle B. Green1Daniel Sturman2Rachel A. Searston3School of Psychology, The University of AdelaideSchool of Psychology, The University of AdelaideSchool of Psychology, The University of AdelaideSchool of Psychology, The University of AdelaideAbstract Media portrayals of scientific disagreements can blur distinctions between experts and non-experts, or include disagreements from vested individuals, potentially undermining trust in science and belief in scientific claims. We investigated how disagreeing sources’ expertise and conflicting interests impact trust in scientific experts and belief in their claims, and whether scientific literacy moderates these effects. Across three, 2 × 2 factorial experiments with a student (N = 105) online (N = 110), and general Australian sample (N = 105), participants read articles describing a scientific claim followed by a disagreeing source whose subject-matter expertise (present/absent) and vested interest (present/absent) were manipulated. Participants in all samples judged the original scientific expert as more trustworthy and their claims more believable when the disagreeing source lacked relevant subject-matter expertise. Among student participants, conflicts of interest also impacted belief in scientific claims (but not trust in the scientist), and scientific literacy enhanced sensitivity to expertise and conflict, however, the other samples were largely insensitive to vested interests, and scientific literacy had varied effects in these samples. Our results show disagreement in the news, even from questionable sources, can sway evaluations of scientific claims and scientists, and highlight the value of literacy-based interventions in science communication.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-96333-8Trust in scienceTrust in expertsScience communicationScientific disagreementScientific literacy |
| spellingShingle | Natasha van Antwerpen Estelle B. Green Daniel Sturman Rachel A. Searston The impacts of expertise, conflict, and scientific literacy on trust and belief in scientific disagreements Scientific Reports Trust in science Trust in experts Science communication Scientific disagreement Scientific literacy |
| title | The impacts of expertise, conflict, and scientific literacy on trust and belief in scientific disagreements |
| title_full | The impacts of expertise, conflict, and scientific literacy on trust and belief in scientific disagreements |
| title_fullStr | The impacts of expertise, conflict, and scientific literacy on trust and belief in scientific disagreements |
| title_full_unstemmed | The impacts of expertise, conflict, and scientific literacy on trust and belief in scientific disagreements |
| title_short | The impacts of expertise, conflict, and scientific literacy on trust and belief in scientific disagreements |
| title_sort | impacts of expertise conflict and scientific literacy on trust and belief in scientific disagreements |
| topic | Trust in science Trust in experts Science communication Scientific disagreement Scientific literacy |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-96333-8 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT natashavanantwerpen theimpactsofexpertiseconflictandscientificliteracyontrustandbeliefinscientificdisagreements AT estellebgreen theimpactsofexpertiseconflictandscientificliteracyontrustandbeliefinscientificdisagreements AT danielsturman theimpactsofexpertiseconflictandscientificliteracyontrustandbeliefinscientificdisagreements AT rachelasearston theimpactsofexpertiseconflictandscientificliteracyontrustandbeliefinscientificdisagreements AT natashavanantwerpen impactsofexpertiseconflictandscientificliteracyontrustandbeliefinscientificdisagreements AT estellebgreen impactsofexpertiseconflictandscientificliteracyontrustandbeliefinscientificdisagreements AT danielsturman impactsofexpertiseconflictandscientificliteracyontrustandbeliefinscientificdisagreements AT rachelasearston impactsofexpertiseconflictandscientificliteracyontrustandbeliefinscientificdisagreements |