Skip to content

Trust in science and scientists

Trust in science and scientists is a foundational factor shaping how people evaluate health claims, respond to scientific evidence, and adopt public health recommendations. In the context of misinformation research, trust in scientists emerges as one of the most robust and consistent protective factors against belief in false information — even more robust than education or political affiliation.

The erosion of trust in scientific institutions and expertise has been documented across multiple domains: climate science, vaccines, pandemic response, and biotechnology. This erosion is driven by a mix of factors including deliberate disinformation campaigns, polarization of scientific expertise along political lines, and genuine communication gaps between researchers and the public.

Key psychological mechanisms

Authority and credibility: People evaluate claims partly on their source. Scientists and scientific institutions typically carry high initial credibility, but this credibility is context-dependent and can be damaged by perceived conflicts of interest or poor communication.

Meta-trust: Trust in science is not monolithic. People may trust medical doctors while distrusting epidemiologists; they may trust "science" abstractly while doubting specific scientists working on controversial topics (e.g., climate change, vaccines).

Institutional transparency: Perceived openness, willingness to acknowledge uncertainty, and correction of past errors all strengthen trust in scientific institutions.

Key papers in this wiki

  • Roozenbeek et al. (2020) — Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19: trust in scientists was the strongest predictor of lower misinformation susceptibility across all five countries studied (standardized β = −0.31 to −0.42), outperforming education and other factors. Higher trust in scientists also predicted greater willingness to get vaccinated and higher compliance with health guidance.

Connections