Unwarranted Trust  and Unwarranted Punishment: Scientistic Beliefs Predict Support for Penalizing Science Skeptics

Petar Lukić; Iris Žeželj

doi:10.19090/pp.v18i2.2592

Autori

Petar Lukić Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Belgrade, Serbia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2687-1723
Iris Žeželj Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Belgrade, Serbia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9527-1406

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19090/pp.v18i2.2592

Ključne reči:

scientism, trust in science, trust in scientists, science skepticism, penalization

Apstrakt

Contemporary society demands laypeople to articulate their attitudes towards science. Whilst distrust in science undeniably has detrimental outcomes, we argue that its opposite, uncritical trust in science and scientists (i.e. scientism) also leads to potential unwarranted societal polarization. In Study 1 we observed that people who endorsed scientistic beliefs supported discriminatory policies against people who ignore scientific knowledge or promote anti-scientific views, ranging from restrictions on their media appearance to imprisonment and denial of healthcare. Study 2 replicated the effect and tested its potential mechanism: the tendency to moralize rationality mediated the relationship between scientistic beliefs and support for penalizing measures. Our findings demonstrate that unwarranted beliefs, even if positive in their moderate version, are associated with increased support for unwarranted measures against dissenters.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Reference

Barlett, C. P., & Meier, B. P. (2023). Schadenfreude in the context of opposing vaccination statuses. European Journal of Social Psychology, 53, 1593–1604. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2998

Bicchieri, C., Fatas, E., Aldama, A., Casas, A., Deshpande, I., Lauro, M., ... & Wen, R. (2021). In science we (should) trust: Expectations and compliance across nine countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. PloS one, 16(6), e0252892. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252892

Blanchard-Rohner, G., Caprettini, B., Rohner, D., & Voth, H. J. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 and intensive care unit capacity on vaccination support: Evidence from a two-leg representative survey in the United Kingdom. Journal of Virus Eradication, 7(2), 100044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jve.2021.100044

Bor, A., Jørgensen, F., Lindholt, M. F., & Petersen, M. B. (2023). Moralizing the COVID‐19 pandemic: Self‐interest predicts moral condemnation of other's compliance, distancing, and vaccination. Political Psychology, 44(2), 257-279. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12835

Brauer, M., & Chekroun, P. (2005). The relationship between perceived violation of social norms and social control: Situational factors influencing the reaction to deviance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(7), 1519-1539. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02182.x

Claudy, M. C., Vijayakumar, S., & Campbell, N. (2022). Reckless spreader or blameless victim? How vaccination status affects responses to COVID-19 patients. Social Science & Medicine, 305, 115089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115089

Gauchat, G. (2012). 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

Gielow Jacobs, L. (2022). Freedom of speech and regulation of fake news. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 70(Supplement_1), i278-i311. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avac010

Haack, S. (2012). Six signs of scientism. Logos & Episteme, 3(1), 75-95. https://doi.org/10.5840/logos-episteme20123151

Hamilton, L. C., Hartter, J., & Saito, K. (2015). Trust in scientists on climate change and vaccines. Sage Open, 5(3), 2158244015602752. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015602752

Hatchman, K., Hornsey, M. J., & Barlow, F. K. (2024). The vaccination divide: Exploring moral reasoning associated with intergroup antipathy between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. British Journal of Health Psychology, 29(4), 889-906. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12736

Henkel, L., Sprengholz, P., Korn, L., Betsch, C., & Böhm, R. (2023). The association between vaccination status identification and societal polarization. Nature Human Behaviour, 7(2), 231-239. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01469-6

Hromatko, I., Tonković, M., & Vranić, A. (2021). Trust in science, perceived vulnerability to disease, and adherence to pharmacological and non-pharmacological COVID-19 recommendations. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 664554. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.664554

Huber, R. A., Greussing, E., & Eberl, J. M. (2022). From populism to climate scepticism: the role of institutional trust and attitudes towards science. Environmental Politics, 31(7), 1115-1138. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2021.1978200

Husak, D. (2004). The criminal law as last resort. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 24(2), 207-235. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/24.2.207

Jetten, J., & Hornsey, M. J. (2014). Deviance and dissent in groups. Annual Review of Psychology, 65(1), 461-485. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115151

Kasper, A., Frébert, N., & Testé, B. (2022). Caught COVID-19? Covidiot! Attributions of humanness and social punishment toward an ingroup member who breaks lockdown rules. Social Psychology, 53(2), 84–95. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000478

Kelley, L. (2021, November 20). Pro and anti-vaccination protesters take to Australia streets. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/markets/asia/pro-anti-vaccination-protesters-take-australia-streets-2021-11-20/

Liao, S., Okpala, E., Cheng, L., Li, M., Vishwamitra, N., Hu, H., ... & Costello, M. (2023, August). Analysis of COVID-19 Offensive Tweets and Their Targets. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (pp. 4473-4484). https://doi.org/10.1145/3580305.3599773

Liu, T., Shryane, N., & Elliot, M. (2022). Attitudes to climate change risk: classification of and transitions in the UK population between 2012 and 2020. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01287-1

Lukić, P., & Žeželj, I. (2023). Delineating between scientism and science enthusiasm: Challenges in measuring scientism and the development of novel scale. Public Understanding of Science, 09636625231217900. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625231217900

Mann, M., & Schleifer, C. (2020). Love the science, hate the scientists: Conservative identity protects belief in science and undermines trust in scientists. Social Forces, 99(1), 305-332. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soz156

Moernaut, R., Mast, J., Temmerman, M., & Broersma, M. (2022). Hot weather, hot topic. Polarization and sceptical framing in the climate debate on Twitter. Information, Communication & Society, 25(8), 1047-1066. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1834600

Plohl, N., & Musil, B. (2021). Modeling compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines: The critical role of trust in science. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 26(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2020.1772988

Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 741–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741

Prosser, A. M., Judge, M., Bolderdijk, J. W., Blackwood, L., & Kurz, T. (2020). ‘Distancers’ and ‘non‐distancers’? The potential social psychological impact of moralizing COVID‐19 mitigating practices on sustained behaviour change. British Journal of Social Psychology, 59(3), 653-662. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12399

R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/

Rokeach, M. (1954). The nature and meaning of dogmatism. Psychological Review, 61(3), 194-204. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0060752

Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1-36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02

Rozin, P., & Singh, L. (1999). The moralization of cigarette smoking in the United States. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8(3), 321-337. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0803_07

Salomon, E., Preston, J. L., & Tannenbaum, M. B. (2017). Climate change helplessness and the (de) moralization of individual energy behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 23(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000105

Schachter, S. (1951). Deviation, rejection, and communication. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46(2), 190–207. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0062326

Spence, A., Poortinga, W., Butler, C., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2011). Perceptions of climate change and willingness to save energy related to flood experience. Nature Climate Change, 1(1), 46-49. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1059

Ståhl, T., Zaal, M. P., & Skitka, L. J. (2016). Moralized rationality: Relying on logic and evidence in the formation and evaluation of belief can be seen as a moral issue. PloS one, 11(11), e0166332. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166332

Stenmark, M. (2018). Scientism and its rivals. In: J. De Ridder, R. Peels and R. Van Woudenberg (Eds.), Scientism: Prospects and Problems (pp. 57–82). Oxford, Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190462758.001.0001

Sun, N., Christie, E., Cabal, L., & Amon, J. J. (2022). Human rights in pandemics: criminal and punitive approaches to COVID-19. BMJ Global Health, 7(2), e008232. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-008232