IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0287572.html

Public perception of scientists: Experimental evidence on the role of sociodemographic, partisan, and professional characteristics

Author

Listed:
  • Burak Sonmez
  • Kirils Makarovs
  • Nick Allum

Abstract

Previous research shows that public trust in scientists is often bound up with the messages that they convey and the context in which they communicate. However, in the current study, we examine how the public perceives scientists based on the characteristics of scientists themselves, irrespective of their scientific message and its context. Using a quota sample of U.S. adults, we investigate how scientists’ sociodemographic; partisan; and professional characteristics affect preferences and trust towards them as a scientific adviser to local government. We find that scientists’ party identification and professional characteristics appear to be prominent to understand public preferences towards them.

Suggested Citation

  • Burak Sonmez & Kirils Makarovs & Nick Allum, 2023. "Public perception of scientists: Experimental evidence on the role of sociodemographic, partisan, and professional characteristics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-20, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0287572
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287572
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0287572
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0287572&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0287572?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dan M. Kahan & Donald Braman & John Gastil & Paul Slovic & C. K. Mertz, 2007. "Culture and Identity‐Protective Cognition: Explaining the White‐Male Effect in Risk Perception," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(3), pages 465-505, November.
    2. Jeff Tollefson, 2021. "Tracking QAnon: how Trump turned conspiracy-theory research upside down," Nature, Nature, vol. 590(7845), pages 192-193, February.
    3. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara B. & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 207-221, April.
    4. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Dan M. Kahan & Ellen Peters & Maggie Wittlin & Paul Slovic & Lisa Larrimore Ouellette & Donald Braman & Gregory Mandel, 2012. "The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(10), pages 732-735, October.
    6. Paul E. Green & Abba M. Krieger & Yoram Wind, 2001. "Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis: Reflections and Prospects," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(3_supplem), pages 56-73, June.
    7. Friederike Hendriks & Dorothe Kienhues & Rainer Bromme, 2015. "Measuring Laypeople’s Trust in Experts in a Digital Age: The Muenster Epistemic Trustworthiness Inventory (METI)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Stefanelli, Alberto & Lukac, Martin, 2020. "Subjects, Trials, and Levels: Statistical Power in Conjoint Experiments," SocArXiv spkcy, Center for Open Science.
    9. Horiuchi, Yusaku & Markovich, Zachary & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2022. "Does Conjoint Analysis Mitigate Social Desirability Bias?," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 535-549, October.
    10. repec:osf:socarx:spkcy_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    12. Bansak, Kirk & Hainmueller, Jens & Hangartner, Dominik, 2016. "How economic, humanitarian, and religious concerns shape European attitudes toward asylum seekers," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 67898, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chao Gu & Yi Feng, 2025. "The Influence of Public Engagement with Science on Trust in Science During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Testing a Mediation Model," SAGE Open, , vol. 15(4), pages 21582440251, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Barış Arı & Burak Sonmez, 2025. "Human rights violations and public support for sanctions," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(1), pages 68-84, January.
    2. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2024. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    3. Fumiya Uchikoshi & Hirofumi Miwa & Yoshikuni Ono, 2025. "Gendered Expectations for College Applications: Experimental Evidence from a Gender Inegalitarian Education Context," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 66(5), pages 1-27, August.
    4. Kim, Sung Eun & Park, Jong Hee & Rhee, Inbok & Yang, Joonseok, 2025. "What do aid recipients want? Public attitudes toward foreign aid in developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    5. Liza G. Steele & Laird Gallagher, 2025. "Attitudes Toward Immigrants and Refugees During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the U.S," Journal of International Migration and Integration, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 2593-2627, December.
    6. Hsu Yumin Wang & Stefano Jud & Will Giles, 2025. "Does shaming make non-compliance with international court rulings costlier? Evidence from China," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(7), pages 2445-2453, December.
    7. Kelly Morrison, 2025. "Why voters (sometimes) punish repression," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(7), pages 2203-2220, December.
    8. Abby Córdova & Lucía Tiscornia, 2025. "Law enforcement at the margin of the law: Information provision and support for militarization in Mexico," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(5), pages 1428-1446, September.
    9. Sam Sims & Clare Routledge, 2025. "Understanding the decision (not) to become a teacher: evidence from survey experiments with undergraduates in the UK and US," CEPEO Working Paper Series 25-15, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised Nov 2025.
    10. Krawczyk, Michal & Blasco, Andrea & Gajderowicz, Tomasz & Giergiczny, Marek, 2024. "Support for temporary protection of displaced populations in the EU: A conjoint experiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    11. Janne Tukiainen & Ilona Lahdelma & Mika Maliranta & Risto Rönkkö & Juho Saari, 2024. "The TikTok factor: Young voters and the support for the populist right," Working Papers 351, Työn ja talouden tutkimus LABORE, The Labour Institute for Economic Research LABORE.
    12. Joop Adema & Lasha Chargaziia & Yvonne Giesing & Sarah Necker & Panu Poutvaara, 2025. "What Drives Refugees’ Return After Conflict?," RFBerlin Discussion Paper Series 2565, ROCKWOOL Foundation Berlin (RFBerlin).
    13. Barceló, Joan & Sheen, Greg Chih-Hsin & Tung, Hans H. & Wu, Wen-Chin, 2022. "Vaccine nationalism among the public: A cross-country experimental evidence of own-country bias towards COVID-19 vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    14. Lukas Rudolph & Fabian Haggerty & Paul W. Thurner, 2026. "Examining public support for Ukraine’s defense against autocratic aggression," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 17(1), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Justesen, Mogens K. & Koob, Sigrid & Smid, Sina, 2025. "Clientelism and programmatic redistribution: Evidence from a conjoint survey experiment in Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    16. Becker, Malte & Krüger, Finja & Heidland, Tobias, 2022. "Country, culture or competition: What drives attitudes towards immigrants in Sub-Saharan Africa?," Kiel Working Papers 2224, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    17. Yoshiaki Kubo & Isamu Okada, 2022. "COVID-19 health certification reduces outgroup bias: evidence from a conjoint experiment in Japan," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, December.
    18. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    19. Vrânceanu, Alina & Dinas, Elias & Heidland, Tobias & Ruhs, Martin, 2023. "The European refugee crisis and public support for the externalisation of migration management," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 279441, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    20. Lindgren, Oskar & Jagers, Sverker C. & Lindvall, Daniel, 2026. "The impact of policy design on opposition to restrictive climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0287572. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.