Sponsor
Funding: Studies 1 to 4 were funded in part by a grant from Humility and Conviction in Public Life, a project of the University Connecticut sponsored by the John Templeton Foundation. Data collection for study 5 was funded in part by the Center for Excellence in Health Communication to Underserved Populations (CEHCUP) from the University of Kansas School of Journalism and Mass Communications.
Published In
Science Advances
Document Type
Pre-Print
Publication Date
7-20-2022
Subjects
Public attitudes -- Public opinion, Science and industry
Abstract
Public attitudes that are in opposition to scientific consensus can be disastrous and include rejection of vaccines and opposition to climate change mitigation policies. Five studies examine the interrelationships between opposition to expert consensus on controversial scientific issues, how much people actually know about these issues, and how much they think they know. Across seven critical issues that enjoy substantial scientific consensus, as well as attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines and mitigation measures like mask wearing and social distancing, results indicate that those with the highest levels of opposition have the lowest levels of objective knowledge but the highest levels of subjective knowledge. Implications for scientists, policymakers, and science communicators are discussed.
Locate the Document
DOI
10.1126/sciadv.abo0038
Persistent Identifier
https://archives.pdx.edu/ds/psu/38195
Citation Details
Light, Nicholas; Fernbach, Philip M.; Rabb, Nathaniel; Geana, Mugur V.; and Sloman, Steven A., "Knowledge Overconfidence is Associated with Anti-Consensus Views on Controversial Scientific Issues" (2022). Business Faculty Publications and Presentations. 281.
https://archives.pdx.edu/ds/psu/38195
Description
This is the author’s version of a work. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Science Advances, 8(29), eabo0038.