Subscribe
The latest psychology and neuroscience discoveries.
My Account
  • Mental Health
  • Social Psychology
  • Cognitive Science
  • Psychopharmacology
No Result
View All Result
PsyPost
PsyPost
No Result
View All Result
Home Exclusive Cognitive Science

Science opponents believe their knowledge ranks among the highest, but it is actually among the lowest

by Eric W. Dolan
August 20, 2022
in Cognitive Science

[Subscribe to PsyPost on YouTube to stay up-to-date on the latest developments in psychology and neuroscience]

Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

People with the greatest opposition to the scientific consensus tend to have the lowest levels of objective science knowledge but the highest levels of self-rated knowledge, according to new research published in Science Advances. The findings are in line with the Dunning-Kruger effect, a well-documented phenomenon in which people who are lacking in skills or knowledge tend to overestimate their abilities.

“I am interested in the public’s understanding of science because it is hugely important for societal and environmental wellbeing,” said study author Nick Light, an assistant professor of marketing at Portland State University. “When people act in ways that go against good science, people get sick, lose their homes, lose money, are displaced, or even die (as is the case with COVID, natural disasters, etc.). The better we can understand why people hold attitudes that run counter to scientific consensus, the better scientists or policymakers can design interventions to help people.”

In two initial studies, which included 3,249 U.S. adults recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk and Prolific Academic, participants were randomly assigned to indicate their level of support or opposition to one of seven scientific issues: climate change, genetically-modified foods, nuclear power, vaccination, evolution, the Big Bang, or homeopathic medicine. The participants were asked to rate their understanding of the topic on a 7-point scale, ranging from “Vague understanding” to “Thorough understanding.”

To assess their scientific knowledge, the participants then responded to 34 randomly ordered true-false questions. The questions included a broad range of scientific topics, including “True or false? The center of the earth is very hot,” “True or false? All insects have eight legs,” and “True or false? Venus is the closest planet to the sun.”

Light and his research team found that people who were more opposed to the scientific consensus on their given topic were more likely to claim to have a “thorough understanding” of it. But those who were more opposed to the scientific consensus tended to score worse on the test of objective science knowledge.

“Scientists are constantly debating the best ways to explain the world around us,” Light told PsyPost. “Sometimes, however, the evidence is so strong or consistent that most of them agree on something. That’s what we call scientific consensus. In this paper we find that the people who have attitudes that are more extremely against the scientific consensus think they know the most about the scientific issues, but actually know the least.”

The researchers also found some evidence that political polarization could weaken these relationships. For more politically polarized issues, the relationship between opposition to the scientific consensus and objective knowledge was not quite as negative.

“The main caveat is that although this pattern of effects appears to be fairly general, we don’t find it for all issues,” Light said. “One notable example is climate change. Our next steps include really digging deeper into the psychology to try to figure out why we don’t find these effects for some issues.”

In a third study, which included 1,173 U.S. adults, the participants were given the opportunity to bet on their ability to score above average on the test of objective science knowledge. In line with the previous studies, Light and his colleagues found that participants with greater opposition to the scientific consensus tended to earn less due to knowledge overconfidence.

In a fourth study, which included 501 participants, the researchers examined whether knowledge overconfidence was related to the willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. The study was conducted in July 2020, before a vaccine was publicly available. The participants were asked their willingness to receive a vaccination in the future and then rated their understanding of how a COVID-19 vaccine would work.

The participants then completed a 23-question test of scientific knowledge, which included six items about COVID-19, such as “True or false? COVID-19 is a kind of bacteria” and “True or false? COVID-19 can be transmitted through houseflies.”

Light and his colleagues found that participants who were more opposed to receiving a vaccine tended to report having a greater understanding of how a COVID-19 vaccine would work, but their general knowledge of science and COVID-19 tended to be worse.

A fifth study of 695 participants, conducted in September 2020, found a similar pattern of results regarding COVID-19 mitigation policies. The results held even after controlling for political identity.

The researchers said the findings have some practical implications for science communicators and policymakers.

“Given that the most extreme opponents of the scientific consensus tend to be those who are most overconfident in their knowledge, fact-based educational interventions are less likely to be effective for this audience,” Light and his colleagues wrote. “For instance, The Ad Council conducted one of the largest public education campaigns in history in an effort to convince people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. If individuals who hold strong antivaccine beliefs already think that they know all there is to know about vaccination and COVID-19, then the campaign is unlikely to persuade them.”

The study, “Knowledge overconfidence is associated with anti-consensus views on controversial scientific issues“, was authored by Nicholas Light, Philip M. Fernbach, Nathaniel Rabb, Mugur V. Geana, and Steven A. Sloman.

ShareTweetSendScanShareSharePin3Send

STAY CONNECTED

TRENDING

Toxoplasma gondii parasite infection linked to cognitive deterioration in schizophrenia

People are less satisfied with their marriage when their partner is not interested in social interactions, study finds

Narcissism and mental health in relationships: Surprising results revealed in new psychology study

Sleep effort mediates the relationship between anxiety and depression, study finds

New research shows link between tropical vacations and improved mental health

Pro-female and anti-male biases are more influential than race and other factors in Implicit Association Tests

RECENT

Linguistic analysis of 177,296 Reddit comments sheds light on negative attitudes toward science

Are you a frequent apologizer? New research indicates you might actually reap downstream benefits

Pro-female and anti-male biases are more influential than race and other factors in Implicit Association Tests

Toxoplasma gondii parasite infection linked to cognitive deterioration in schizophrenia

New research shows link between tropical vacations and improved mental health

Narcissism and mental health in relationships: Surprising results revealed in new psychology study

Sleep effort mediates the relationship between anxiety and depression, study finds

Masks hinder our ability to recognize facial expressions of sadness and fear

Currently Playing

Are you a frequent apologizer? New research indicates you might actually reap downstream benefits

Are you a frequent apologizer? New research indicates you might actually reap downstream benefits

Are you a frequent apologizer? New research indicates you might actually reap downstream benefits

Social Psychology
People with dark personality traits are better at finding novel ways to cause damage or harm others

People with dark personality traits are better at finding novel ways to cause damage or harm others

Dark Triad
Exercising in nature produces psychological benefits and measurable changes in brain activity

Exercising in nature produces psychological benefits and measurable changes in brain activity

Cognitive Science
People with social anxiety tend to engage in restrictive “safety behaviors” that make them less likable, study finds

People with social anxiety tend to engage in restrictive “safety behaviors” that make them less likable, study finds

Anxiety
Study helps untangle the complicated relationship between psychopathy and emotional awareness

Study helps untangle the complicated relationship between psychopathy and emotional awareness

Psychopathy
People exposed to phubbing by their romantic partner are less satisfied with their romantic relationship

People exposed to phubbing by their romantic partner are less satisfied with their romantic relationship

Relationships and Sexual Health
  • Cognitive Science
  • COVID-19
  • Mental Health
  • Social Psychology
  • Drug Research
  • Conspiracy Theories
  • Meditation
  • Psychology of Religion
  • Aviation Psychology and Human Factors
  • Relationships and Sexual Health
  • Evolutionary Psychology
  • Neuroimaging
  • Psychedelic Drugs
  • Dark Triad
  • Political Psychology

About

PsyPost is a psychology and neuroscience news website dedicated to reporting the latest research on human behavior, cognition, and society. (READ MORE...)

  • Contact us
  • Privacy policy

Subscribe
  • My Account
  • Cognitive Science Research
  • Mental Health Research
  • Social Psychology Research
  • Drug Research
  • Relationship Research
  • About PsyPost
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In

Add New Playlist

This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are giving consent to cookies being used.