Transcript Slide 1

www.culturalcognition.net
Decision-relevant Science: How Do People
Think About It?
Dan M. Kahan
Yale University
Research Supported by:
National Science Foundation, SES-0242106, -0621840 & -0922714
Woodrow Wilson Int’l Center for Scholars
It’s time for ...
“Public science comprehension—believe it or not!”
1. “Belief”/“disbelief” in evolution
2. Climate change risk perception (“fast & slow”)
3. Antibiotics: consensus, scientific & public
Half the population of the US “disbelieves” evolution...
but the half that “believes” in it isn’t any more likely to be able to
explain “natural selection,” “genetic variance,” or “random
mutation” ...
Shtulman, A. Qualitative differences between naïve and scientific theories of evolution!
Cognitive Psychology 52, 170-194 (2006).
and being taught the “modern synthesis” doesn’t increase “belief”
in evolution!
Bishop, B.A. & Anderson, C.W. Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in
evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 27, 415-427 (1990).
Demastes, S.S., Settlage, J. & Good, R. Students' conceptions of natural selection and its
role in evolution: Cases of replication and comparison. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching 32, 535-550 (1995).
Lawson, A.E. & Worsnop, W.A. Learning about evolution and rejecting a belief in special
creation: Effects of reflective reasoning skill, prior knowledge, prior belief and religious
commitment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 29, 143-166 (2006).
but the half that “believes” in it isn’t any more likely to be able to
explain “natural selection,” “genetic variance,” or “random
mutation” ...
Shtulman, A. Qualitative differences between naïve and scientific theories of evolution!
Cognitive Psychology 52, 170-194 (2006).
and being taught the “modern synthesis” doesn’t increase “belief”
in evolution!
Bishop, B.A. & Anderson, C.W. Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in
evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 27, 415-427 (1990).
Demastes, S.S., Settlage, J. & Good, R. Students' conceptions of natural selection and its
role in evolution: Cases of replication and comparison. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching 32, 535-550 (1995).
Lawson, A.E. & Worsnop, W.A. Learning about evolution and rejecting a belief in special
creation: Effects of reflective reasoning skill, prior knowledge, prior belief and religious
commitment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 29, 143-166 (2006).
It’s time for ...
“Public science comprehension—believe it or not!”
1. “Belief”/“disbelief” in evolution
2. Climate change risk perception (“fast & slow”)
3. Antibiotics: consensus, scientific & public
The public doesn’t understand the science necessary to assess
valid evidence of climate change...
1994
2010
and
and the public generally over-relies on cognitive heuristics to form
perceptions of environmental and other forms of risk...
but
but the members of the general public who are most science
literate and who score highest on measures of cognitive reflection
but the members of the general public who are most science
literate and who score highest on measures of cognitive reflection
(Kahneman’s “slow” reasoning)
but the members of the general public who are most science
literate and who score highest on measures of cognitive reflection
(Kahneman’s “slow” reasoning) are the most culturally and
politically polarized on climate change!
It’s time for ...
“Public science comprehension—believe it or not!”
1. “Belief”/“disbelief” in evolution
2. Climate change risk perception (“fast & slow”)
3. Antibiotics: consensus, scientific & public
There is no meaningful level of public disagreement—cultural or
otherwise—over whether someone who is seriously ill should
seek medical treatment, and take antibiotics if a physician
prescribes them. . .
but
but 50% of the general public believes that antibiotics kill viruses
as well as bacteria!
but 50% of the general public believes that antibiotics kill viruses
as well as bacteria!
It’s time for ...
“Public science comprehension—believe it or not!”
1. “Belief”/“disbelief” in evolution
2. Climate change risk perception (“fast & slow”)
3. Antibiotics: consensus, scientific & public
Decision-relevant science (DRS) & public understanding:
five theses
I.
Individuals must accept as known more DRS than they can
ever possibly understand.
II.
Individuals acquire the insights of DRS by reliably
recognizing who has it.
III.
Public conflict over DRS is a recognition problem, not a
comprehension problem.
IV.
The recognition problem reflects a polluted science
communication environment.
V.
Acquiring the knowledge to protect the science
communication environment from contamination is a
critical aim of the science of science communication.
Cultural dissensus over scientific consensus
Decision-relevant science (DRS) & public understanding:
five theses
I.
Individuals must accept as known more DRS than they can
ever possibly understand.
II.
Individuals acquire the insights of DRS by reliably
recognizing who has it.
III.
Public conflict over DRS is a recognition problem, not a
comprehension problem.
IV.
The recognition problem reflects a polluted science
communication environment.
V.
Acquiring the knowledge to protect the science
communication environment from contamination is a
critical aim of the science of science communication.
The polluted science communication environment:
antagonistic cultural meanings
The polluted science communication environment:
antagonistic cultural meanings
vs.
The polluted science communication environment:
antagonistic cultural meanings
The U.S. is culturally polarized over the risks and benefits of
administering the HPV vaccine to schoolgirls (-boys too) to protect
them from a sexually transmitted disease that causes a deadly
form of cancer...
The U.S. is culturally polarized over the risks and benefits of
administering the HPV vaccine to schoolgirls (-boys too) to protect
them from a sexually transmitted disease that causes a deadly
form of cancer...
but the U.S. is not culturally polarized over the HBV vaccine, which
is also administered to children to protect them from a sexually
transmitted disease that causes a deadly form of cancer!
Decision-relevant science (DRS) & public understanding:
five theses
I.
Individuals must accept as known more DRS than they can
ever possibly understand.
II.
Individuals acquire the insights of DRS by reliably
recognizing who has it.
III.
Public conflict over DRS is a recognition problem, not a
comprehension problem.
IV.
The recognition problem reflects a polluted science
communication environment.
V.
Protecting the science communication environment from
contamination is a critical aim of the science of science
communication.
The science of science communication: protecting the
science communication environment
Decision-relevant science (DRS) & public understanding:
five theses
I.
Individuals must accept as known more DRS than they can
ever possibly understand.
II.
Individuals acquire the insights of DRS by reliably
recognizing who has it.
III.
Public conflict over DRS is a recognition problem, not a
comprehension problem.
IV.
The recognition problem reflects a polluted science
communication environment.
V.
Protecting the science communication environment from
contamination is a critical aim of the science of science
communication.
Decision-relevant science (DRS) & public understanding:
five theses
I.
Individuals must accept as known more DRS than they can
ever possibly understand.
II.
Individuals acquire the insights of DRS by reliably
recognizing who has it.
III.
Public conflict over DRS is a recognition problem, not a
comprehension problem.
IV.
The recognition problem reflects a polluted science
communication environment.
V.
Protecting the science communication environment from
contamination is a critical aim of the science of science
communication.
Decision-relevant science (DRS) & public understanding:
five theses
I.
Individuals must accept as known more DRS than they can
ever possibly understand.
II.
Individuals acquire the insights of DRS by reliably
recognizing who has it.
III.
Public conflict over DRS is a recognition problem, not a
comprehension problem.
IV.
The recognition problem reflects a polluted science
communication environment.
V.
Protecting the science communication environment from
contamination is a critical aim of the science of science
communication.
Decision-relevant science (DRS) & public understanding:
five theses
I.
Individuals must accept as known more DRS than they can
ever possibly understand.
II.
Individuals acquire the insights of DRS by reliably
recognizing who has it.
III.
Public conflict over DRS is a recognition problem, not a
comprehension problem.
IV.
The recognition problem reflects a polluted science
communication environment.
V.
Protecting the science communication environment from
contamination is a critical aim of the science of science
communication.
Ralph says: “Listen to Danny—and other scholars who are
using science to improve science communication!