Polarización ideológica en torno a la ciencia en España: el caso de las actitudes anticientíficas, las creencias conspirativas y la confianza en los científicos
Barra lateral del artículo
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
La polarización social en torno a los hechos científicos se ha visto exacerbada recientemente por la proliferación de movimientos y partidos políticos populistas. A partir de los datos de la Encuesta de Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología realizada por la Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología (FECYT), estudiamos la polarización ideológica en torno a la ciencia en España. Utilizamos la técnica de ANOVA para analizar la formación de grupos ideológicos en torno a tres constructos teóricos: actitudes anticientíficas, creencias conspirativas y confianza en los científicos. Los grupos ideológicos identificados son los grupos populistas de izquierda, de izquierda, de derecha y populistas de derecha. Los resultados muestran la polarización ideológica de la población española en torno a las tres variables utilizadas. En general, los grupos de izquierda y de derecha sostienen las posiciones más moderadas. En cambio, los grupos populistas de izquierda muestran mayor tendencia a tener actitudes prociencia. Por otro lado, los grupos ideológicos populistas de derecha son más propensos a mantener posiciones contrarias a la ciencia, creencias conspirativas y menos confianza en los científicos. Sin embargo, no se puede argumentar que estos grupos adopten posiciones extremadamente radicales respecto a los constructos analizados.
Descargas
Detalles del artículo
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
Funding data
-
Conselleria de Innovación, Universidades, Ciencia y Sociedad Digital, Generalitat Valenciana
Grant numbers 2021/00672
Citas
Allington, D., Duffy, B., Wessely, S., Dhavan y N., Rubin, J. (2021). Health-Protective Behaviour, Social Media Usage and Conspiracy Belief During the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency – CORRIGENDUM. Psychological Medicine, 51(10), 1770-1770. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329172100059
Allum, N., Sturgis, P., Tabourazi, D. y Brunton-Smith, I. (2008). Science knowledge and attitudes across cultures: a meta- analysis. Public Understanding of Science, 17(1), 35- 54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506070159
Bellolio, C. (2022). An Inquiry into Populism’s Relation to Science. Politics, 44(3), 486- 500. https://doi.org/10.1177/02633957221109541
Berlin, P., Nera, K. y Delouvée, S. (2020). Conspiracy Beliefs, Rejection of Vaccination, and Support for Hydroxychloroquine: A Conceptual Replication-Extension in the COVID-19 Pandemic Context. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 565128. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.565128
Bramson, A., Grim, P., Singer, D. J., Berger, W. J., Sack, G., Fisher, S., Flocken, C. y Holman, B. (2017). Understanding polarization: Meanings, measures, and model evaluation. Philosophy of Science, 84(1),115- 159. https://doi.org/10.1086/688938
Capasso, M., Caso, D. y Zimet, G. (2022). The Mediating Roles of Attitude Toward COVID-19 Vaccination, Trust in Science and Trust in Government in the Relationship Between Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs and Vaccination Intention. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 936917. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.936917
Drummond, C. y Fischhoff, B. (2017). Individuals with greater science literacy and education have more polarized beliefs on controversial science topics. PNAS, 114(36), 9587- 9592. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704882114
Funk, C., y Tyson, A. (2021). Growing Share of Americans Say They Plan to Get a COVID-19 Vaccine–or Already Have. Pew Research Center, March 5, 2021. Disponible en: https://is.gd/0KpBns
Furnham, A., y Grover, S. (2021). Do You Have to be Mad to Believe in Conspiracy Theories? Personality Disorders and Conspiracy Theories. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 68(7), 00207640211031614. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764021103161
Gauchat, G. (2012a). Politicization of Science in the Public Sphere: A Study of Public Trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. American Sociological Review, 77(2), 167-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412438225
Gauchat, G. (2012b). A Test of Three Theories of Anti-Science Attitudes. Sociological Focus, 41(4), 337-357. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380237.2008.10571338
Gauchat, G. (2015). The Political Context of Science in the United States: Public Acceptance of Evidence-Based Policy and Science Funding. Social Forces, 94(2), 723-746. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sov040
Gauchat, G. (2023). The Legitimacy of Science. Annual Review of Sociology, 49, 263- 279. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-030320-035037
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford University Press.
Hendriks, F., Kienhues, D., y Bromme, R. (2015). Measuring laypeople’s trust in experts in a digital age: The Muenster Epistemic Trustworthiness Inventory (METI). PLoS One, 10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139309
Hendriks, F., Kienhues, D., y Bromme, R. (2016). Trust in science and the science of trust. En B. Blöbaum, (Ed.). Trust and communication in a digitized world: models and concepts of trust research (pp. 143-159). Springer International Publishing/Springer Nature.
Huber, R. (2020). The role of populist attitudes in explaining climate change skepticism and support for environmental protection. Environmental Politics, 29(6), 959- 982. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2019.1708186
Imhoff, R., Zimmer, F., Klein, O. et al. (2022). Conspiracy Mentality and Political Orientation Across 26 Countries. Nature Human Behaviour, 6, 392-403. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01258-7
Inglehart, R. (1987). Extremist Political Position and Perceptions of Conspiracy: Even Paranoids have Real Enemies. In C. F. Graumann, y S. Moscovici (Eds.). Changing Conceptions of Conspiracy, (pp. 231-244). Springer-Verlag.
Jasanoff, S. (1990). The Fifth Branch. Science Advisers as Policymakers. Harvard University Press.
Jiménez-Loaisa, F. J., Jareño-Ruiz, D. y de-Gracia-Soriano, P. (2024). The science of trust in science: COVID-19 and its implications for “trust”. En A. Visvizi, O. Troisi, y V. Corvello, (Eds.). Research and Innovation Forum 2023. Springer Proceedings in Complexity, (pp. 673-683). Springer.
Kienhues, D., Jucks, R., y Bromme, R. (2020). Sealing the Gateways for Post-Truthism: Reestablishing the Epistemic Authority of˙ Science. Educational Psychologist, 55(3), 133- 154. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1784012
Küçükaydin, M. A., Esen, S., y Gürbüzer, S. (2023). Did We Trust in Science During the COVID-19 Pandemic? Modeling the Relationship Between Trust, Awareness, and Conspiracy Theories. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 37(6), 1266-1276. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.4120
Lobera, J., Torres-Albero, C. (2017). “Factores sociales de la oposición a aplicaciones tecnocientíficas controvertidas”, en FECYT, Percepción social de la ciencia y la tecnología 2016. Diaponible en: https://www.fecyt.es/es/noticia/encuestas-de-percepcion-social-de-la-ciencia-y-la-tecnologia-en-espana
Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. Wiley.
Marques, M., Kerr, J., y LcLennan, J. (2021). Associations between conspiracism and the rejection of scientific innovations. Public Understanding of Science, 30(7), 854- 867. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625211007013
Mayer, R. C., David, J. H., y Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734. https://doi.org/10.2307/258792
Merkley, E. (2020). Anti-intelectualismo, populismo y resistencia motivada al consenso de los expertos. Opinión Pública Trimestral, 84, 24-48.
Mousoulidou, M., Christodoulou, A., Siakalli, M., yArgyrides, M. (2023). The Role of Conspiracy Theories, Perceived Risk, and Trust in Science on COVID-19 vaccination Decisiveness: Evidence from Cyprus. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(4), 2898. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20042898
O’Connor, C., y Weatherall, J. O. (2017). Scientific polarization. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 8, 855-875. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-018-0213-9
Oliver, J. E., y Wood, T. J. (2014). Conspiracy Theories and the Paranoid Style(s) of Mass Opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 58, 952-966. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12084
Oreskes, N. (2021). Why trust in science? Princeton University Press.
Oreskes, N., y Conway, E. M. (2022). From Anti-Government to Anti-Science: Why Conservatives Have Turned Against Science. Daedalus, 151(4), 98-123. https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01946
Pummerer, L., Böhm, R., Lilleholt, L., Winter, K., Zettler, I. y Sassenberg, K. (2022). Conspiracy Theories and Their Societal Effects During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(1), 49-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211000217
Radrizzani, S., Fonseca, C., Woollard, A., Pettit, J., Hurst, L. (2023). Both trust in, and polarization of trust in, relevant sciences have increased through the COVID- 19 pandemic. PLoS ONE, 18, e0278169, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278169
Reif, A., Taddicken, M., Guenther, L., Schröder, J. T. y Weingart, P. (2024). La Escala de Confianza Pública en la Ciencia (PuTS): Un enfoque multinivel y multidimensional. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/bp8s6
Rekker, R. (2021). The nature and origins of political polarization over science. Public Understanding of Science 30(4), 352-368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662521989193
Salvador Casara, B. G., Martinez-Conde, S., Dolinski, D., Suitner, C., Genschow, O., Muniak, P., Kulesza, W. (2022). Trust in Scientists, Risk Perception, Conspiratorial Beliefs, and Unrealistic Optimism: A Network Approach to Investigating the Psychological Underpinnings of COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions. Social Psychological Bulletin, 17, e7807. https://doi.org/10.32872/spb.7807
Schmid, P.,y Betsch, C. (2019). Effective Strategies for Rebutting Science Denialism in Public Discussions. Nature Human Behaviour, 9, 931-939. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0632-4
Seyd, B., Hamm, J., Jennings, W., McKay, L., Valgarđsson, V. y Anness, M. (2024). ‘Follow the Science’: Popular Trust in Scientific Experts During the Coronavirus Pandemic. Public Understanding of Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625241253968
Swami, V., Voracek, m., Stieger, S., Tran, U. S., Furnham. (2014). Analytic Thinking Reduces Belief in Conspiracy Theories. Cognition, 133(3), 572-585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.08.006
Szabados, K. (2019). Can We Win the War on Science? Understanding the Link between Political Populism and Anti-Science Politics. Populism, 2(2), 207-236. https://doi.org/10.1163/25888072-02021028
Torres-Albero, C., Lobera, J. (2017). El declive de la fe en el progreso. Posmaterialismo, ideología y religiosidad en las representaciones sociales de la tecnociencia. Revista Internacional de Sociología, 75(3), e069. https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2017.75.3.16.61
van Prooijen, J.-W. (2017). Why Education Predicts Decreased Belief in Conspiracy Theories. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 31(1), 50-58. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3301
Van Vliet, L. (2019). EenVandaag Opiniepanel rapport: Onderzoek klimaatverandering [EenVandaag Opinion Panel report: Survey on climate change], in EenVandaag. Disponible en: https://is.gd/QnQbvf
Waisbord, S. (2018). The elective affinity between post-truth communication and populist politics. Communication Research and Practice, 4(1),17-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2018.1428928