How To Handle Lack Of Trust In Science

 Excellent explanation of how science works as it is performed by humans.

Critikid

I see many posts from science communicators along the lines of:

"Regular guy thinks he is more knowledgeable than the world's leading experts after spending 10 minutes on Google."

While intellectual humility is certainly in short supply, I don't think the main reason people doubt experts is that they think they are more knowledgeable than experts.

It is because they think experts are lying.

You don't often hear people saying to experts, "You don't have sufficient knowledge in the field."

It is more often: "You're a shill" and "Who paid you?"

The doubt usually stems from the idea that experts are motivated to distort the truth for profit or some other agenda. (And this isn't always wrong.)

Understanding the reason for a person's doubt is important because then we can address their actual concerns. We can explain what a "consensus" means in science. We should acknowledge that some scientists do lie and all humans are biased, but also point out that science is designed to correct for these errors.

We should admit that some of their concerns may be valid, and use this as a starting point for considering what needs to be done to rebuild trust in science.

- - - - - - - - -

A 2-minute video expanding on how to effectively communicate with those who don't trust or misunderstand science: https://www.facebook.com/critikids/videos/1240752207014680

To Fight Health Disinformation, Focus On Low Expertise

"Disinformation is false information spread intentionally, and it is particularly harmful for public health. We conducted three preregistered experiments (N = 1,568) investigating how to discredit dubious health sources and disinformation attributed to them. Experiments 1 and 2 used cancer information and recruited representative U.S. samples. Participants read a vignette about a seemingly reputable source and rated their credibility. Participants were randomly assigned to a control condition or interventions that (a) corrected the source’s disinformation, (b) highlighted the source’s low expertise, or (c) corrected disinformation and highlighted low expertise (Experiment 2). Next, participants rated their belief in the source’s disinformation claims and rerated their credibility. We found that highlighting low expertise was equivalent to (or more effective than) other interventions for reducing belief in disinformation. Highlighting low expertise was also more effective than correcting disinformation for reducing source credibility, although combining it with correcting disinformation outperformed low expertise alone (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 extended this paradigm to vaccine information in vaccinated and unvaccinated subgroups. A conflict-of-interest intervention and 1-week retention interval were also added. Highlighting low expertise was the most effective intervention in both vaccinated and unvaccinated participants for reducing belief in disinformation and source credibility. It was also the only condition where belief change was sustained over 1 week, but only in the vaccinated subgroup. In sum, *highlighting a source’s lack of expertise is a promising option for fact-checkers and health practitioners to reduce belief in disinformation and perceived credibility."

https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2025-19881-005.html

*The US Republican Party is a major source of disinformation on MANY topics. (https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/11/trump-disinformation-immigrants-storm-00183378)

Why Can't The Majority Accept Expert Opinion?

Fact: Biden is ranked 14th in scholars' presidential rankings; Trump is last (link)

Fact: Trump is ahead in most of the latest polls (link)

Fact: Republican and MAGA voters vote against themselves, especially in the south (link)

- - - - - - - - -

Thus, there is a need for universal education in Critical Thinking! (link)

Biden 14th in scholars' presidential rankings, Trump lastBiden 14th in scholars' presidential rankings, Trump lastBiden 14th in scholars' presidential rankings, Trump lastBiden 14th in scholars' presidential rankings, Trump lastBiden 14th in scholars' presidential rankings, Trump last

All Experts Out Of The US Federal Government If Republicans Win

"In a scathing dissent from the bench on Friday, Justice Elena Kagan excoriated her conservative colleagues for inserting themselves into the realm of current and future regulation and warned of an impending massive shock to the administrative system.

'A longstanding precedent at the crux of administrative governance thus falls victim to a bald assertion of judicial authority,' Kagan said of the court’s ruling. 'The majority disdains restraint, and grasps for power.'

"In a 6-3 ruling, the justices on Friday ended the 40-year practice that informed federal judges’ decision-making when federal agencies and their actions were challenged. The high court's 1984 ruling in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council had limited judicial decision-making in favor of agency expertise.

"A range of experts jumped on Kagan’s premonition, joining her in warning that Friday's decision will have far-reaching effects. From the halls of Congress to federal courtrooms, they say the decision opens the window for an increase in litigation against federal rules, as well as a potential chill on new ones.

“The federal government and environmental groups are going to be up to our ears in litigation just trying to preserve the status quo,” Sam Sankar, the senior vice president of programs at Earthjustice, said in a press briefing following the ruling."

As bad as the recent "Presidential Immunity" decision of the US Supreme Court was, this may have more harm. 

Click on the link below for more:

Ignorance and power trump expertise 

- - - - - - - - -

Click here to help save consumer protections.

Republicans Reject Experts

Click on the links below for examples of the decades-long anti-expert attitude of the Republican Party:

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/10/what-caused-the-u-s-anti-science-trend/

https://www.cnn.com/2016/08/08/politics/republican-national-security-letter-donald-trump-election-2016/index.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-reason-some-republicans-mistrust-science-their-leaders-tell-them-to/

https://newrepublic.com/article/158436/republican-murderous-anti-intellectualism

https://www.amazon.com/Republican-Brain-Science-Science-Reality/dp/1118094514

History, Authority, Expert, And Growing Up

History: the study of past events.

Authority: the power to influence or command thought, opinion, or behavior.

Expert: a person who has a comprehensive and authoritative knowledge of or skill in a particular area.

- - - - - - -

Human history began in ignorance, violence, and within small nomadic groups. As time progressed, humans became more organized and settled but ignorance and authoritarian control persisted. Democratic ideas evolved out of Greece but humanity at large was still ignorant of reality and under authoritarian control. Organized religion sprouted from persistent human ignorance of reality in attempts to explain the unexplainable, as well as to reinforce authoritarian control and to provide some comfort. Eventually, only a few hundred years ago, modern science and the Industrial Revolution sprouted. These phenomena exponentially expanded human knowledge, progress, and well-being. Democracy became a reality and knowledge expanded to the point where it caused the founding of institutions dedicated to creating expertise in specialized areas. 

The above growth in freedom, knowledge, and understanding of reality can be viewed as being analogous to a child growing up. However, there is a major immaturity from our ignorant and superstitious past holding humanity back and it is religion. Ironically, the most prominent religion has the following teaching but can't accept it as a reality:

• "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things." ~ I Corinthians

ISN'T IT MORE THAN TIME FOR HUMANITY TO GROW UP?

 

A Look At Expertise

What is the science-based view of expertise, "skill or knowledge in a particular area"? Click on the link below for an in-depth look at this topic that is misunderstood by anti-science/magical thinkers, as well as many science-based thinkers:

The 4 things it takes to be an expert

No Matter The Topic, Experts Are Ignored In The USA

"A tussle between science and politics is defining the pandemic response of the Trump administration. How did this increasing rejection of expertise get started?"
- - - - - - -

Most of what we, as individuals, "know" is not from direct experience but from those around us and from other sources to which we are exposed.

If one is a magical thinker, it is difficult to determine if claims are true because there is no way to justify claims with such an epistemological method. The background of the party making the claim, nor the level of evidence for the claim, are not major considerations whether one should accept the party's opinion.

If one is a science-based thinker, however, one uses the scientific method to evaluate all claims on our objective reality. The method contains internal elements that justify/verify the results through such measures as peer review and replication. The higher the level of expertise in the appropriate areas and the quality of evidence supporting the claims, the more confidence one may have in the findings.

The link below highlights the history and our present crisis of generally rejecting the experts and it's consequences:

Why Don't Americans Trust Experts any more?