32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Who Doesn’t Trust Fauci? The Public’s Belief in the Expertise and Shared Values of Scientists in the COVID-19 Pandemic

      1 , 2
      Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World
      SAGE Publications

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The primary tension in public discourse about the U.S. government’s response to the coronavirus pandemic has been President Trump’s disagreement with scientists. The authors analyze a national survey of 1,593 Americans to examine which social groups agree with scientists’ ability to understand the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and which agree that COVID-19 scientists share their values. Republicans and independents are less trusting than Democrats on both measures, as are African Americans. The authors find conservative Protestants and Catholics to be skeptical of scientists’ knowledge but not their values. Working-class men and those who live outside cities believe in scientists’ knowledge but do not think they share scientists’ values. There is little evidence for a direct effect of President Trump’s criticism of scientists. The authors discuss the pragmatic implications for scientists trying to remain influential in COVID-19 policy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          Cultural Backlash

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            New Media and the Polarization of American Political Discourse

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science

              Populism is on the rise in many countries. Scholars have stated that it is characteristic for political populism to describe society as a fundamental struggle between an allegedly virtuous people and political elites which are portrayed negatively. This anti-elitist sentiment not only targets politicians, however, but also other representatives of the alleged establishment—including scientists and scholarly institutions. But the specifics of such science-related populism have not yet been conceptualized. We aim to do so, integrating scholarship on political populism, the “participatory turn,” and alternative epistemologies. We propose to conceptualize science-related populism as a set of ideas which suggests that there is a morally charged antagonism between an (allegedly) virtuous ordinary people and an (allegedly) unvirtuous academic elite, and that this antagonism is due to the elite illegitimately claiming and the people legitimately demanding both science-related decision-making sovereignty and truth-speaking sovereignty.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World
                Socius
                SAGE Publications
                2378-0231
                2378-0231
                January 2020
                August 06 2020
                January 2020
                : 6
                : 237802312094733
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
                [2 ]University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
                Article
                10.1177/2378023120947337
                0cbf6183-120b-41c6-9221-8512b42f3352
                © 2020

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article