2020/10/27 by Randy Stein, Alexander B. Swan, Michelle Sarraf · 1 citation
Social Sciences · #Climate Change Communication and Perception #Social and Intergroup Psychology #Misinformation and Its Impacts
paper · doi:10.1111/pops.12706
openalex publication_date 2020/10/27 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30
Two studies examined how political ideology relates to attitudes towards opposing scientific and nonscientific perspectives on apolitical topics. Participants read an article excerpt containing quotes from a researcher debunking a common misconception, such as the existence of lucky streaks in games of chance. They also read the perspective of someone who rejected the researcher in favor of personal experience, either in the form of a quote in the article from a relevant professional (e.g., a casino manager, Study 1) or a comment from a purported previous respondent with no clear expertise (Study 2). In both studies, conservatives, compared to liberals, evaluated the views of the scientist and the person rejecting the science as closer in legitimacy. Differences in evaluation of the science rejecter were mediated by conservatives' heightened intuitive thinking. By spotlighting how partisans evaluate nonscientific perspectives alongside science and by focusing on apolitical topics, these results bring new clarity to the debate on whether conservatives are more biased than liberals in attitudes towards science.