V času pandemije covida-19, za katero je, sploh v začetnih fazah, bilo značilno širjenje velike količine nasprotujočih si informacij in negotovosti, smo lahko v medijih pogosto zasledili poudarjanje pomena zaupanja znanosti in znanstvenikom. Medtem ko so nekatera pretekla znanstvena dela resnično kazala, da bi zaupanje v znanost lahko bilo pomemben napovednik zdravstvenih odločitev, kot so denimo odločitve glede cepljenja, je bilo tovrstnih raziskav zelo malo in so nudile precej omejen vpogled v ozadje opaženih odnosov. Prav tako je bilo v literaturi prisotnih precej nejasnosti glede opredelitve zaupanja v znanost, najboljših načinov merjenja in napovednikov, ki k njemu prispevajo.
V pričujoči doktorski disertaciji smo tako želeli najprej teoretično razjasniti pojmovanje in operacionalizacijo zaupanja v znanost ter celovito pregledati preteklo literaturo o dejavnikih, zdravstvenih izidih in potencialnih razlagah povezave med zaupanjem v znanost in zdravstvenim vedenjem. V nadaljevanju pa smo si prizadevali to znanje nadgraditi s štirimi empiričnimi raziskavami, ki razširjajo naše razumevanje vloge zaupanja v znanost pri napovedovanju vedenja v kontekstu zdravja, povezanih spremenljivk in napovednikov zaupanja v znanost, prav tako pa mehanizmov, ki pojasnjujejo vlogo zaupanja v znanost pri določanju odzivov na z zdravjem povezana sporočila.
Rezultati so pokazali, da je zaupanje v znanost pomemben napovednik upoštevanja smernic za zajezitev širjenja covida-19, ob tem pa predstavlja tudi vezni člen med splošnejšimi sociodemografskimi lastnostmi posameznikov (npr. politično orientiranostjo) in vedenjem v kontekstu covida-19 (raziskava 1). Na ravni populacije se zaupanje v znanost prepleta z znanstveno in zdravstveno pismenostjo ter na tak način tvori homogene podskupine posameznikov, pri čemer skupine z nižjimi ravnmi zaupanja v znanost praviloma izkazujejo tudi nižje ravni zdravega življenjskega sloga in z znanostjo podprtih vedenj, vezanih na covid-19 (raziskava 2). Zaupanje v znanost se med posamezniki precej razlikuje. Višje ravni zaupanja v znanost izkazujejo osebe z nižjo politično konservativnostjo, religioznostjo in zarotniško miselnostjo ter višjo odprtostjo za izkušnje in intelektualno skromnostjo, medtem ko stopnja izobrazbe in reflektiven način razmišljanja nista pomembna napovednika zaupanja v znanost (raziskava 3). Razlike v zdravstvenem vedenju med osebami, ki bolj ali manj zaupajo v znanost, lahko vsaj delno razložimo z razlikami v odzivih na zdravstveno komunikacijo, ki vsebuje vedenjska priporočila. V primeru kontroverznih tem, kot je covid-19, osebe z nizkim zaupanjem v znanost ob izpostavljenosti sporočilu pogosteje doživljajo psihološko reaktanco, kar v naslednjem koraku prispeva tudi k manj ugodnim stališčem in vedenjskim nameram. Tovrstne negativne odzive je mogoče zmanjšati s premišljeno in manj ogrožajočo zdravstveno komunikacijo (raziskava 4).
Ugotovitve raziskav tako konsistentno podpirajo idejo, da je zaupanje v znanost pomemben dejavnik zdravstvenega vedenja. Ker ima še posebej pomembno vlogo v primeru negotovih, čustveno nabitih in osebno relevantnih tematik, bi ga bilo zavoljo oblikovanja družbe, sposobne prilagajanja na prihodnje zdravstvene in druge krize, vredno krepiti, intervencije pa morajo biti premišljene in celovite. Izvedene raziskave ob tem odpirajo tudi nekatera nova raziskovalna vprašanja, kot so vprašanja posplošljivosti opaženih odnosov v druge kulturne kontekste, dolgotrajno učinkovitih načinov spodbujanja zaupanja v znanost in prenosa spoznanj iz zdravstvenega konteksta na druge družbene izzive (na primer podnebne spremembe).During the COVID-19 pandemic, which was, especially in its early stages, characterized by a proliferation of conflicting information and uncertainty, media headlines often stressed the importance of trust in science and scientists. While some previous scientific work has, indeed, implied that trust in science might be an important predictor of health-related decisions, such as the decision to get vaccinated, studies were very scarce and offered a rather limited insight into what underlies these associations. Moreover, the literature suffered from considerable ambiguity regarding how trust in science can be defined, how it should be measured, and which factors determine individuals’ trust.
In the present doctoral thesis, we hence aimed to theoretically clarify the conceptualization and operationalization of trust in science and comprehensively review the past literature on the determinants, health outcomes, and potential explanations of the link between trust in science and health behavior. We then sought to build on this knowledge with four empirical studies that extend our understanding of the role of trust in science in predicting behavior in the health context, the associated variables and predictors of trust in science, and the mechanisms that explain the role of trust in science in determining responses to health-related messages.
The results showed that trust in science is an important predictor of compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines. It also serves as a mediator between individuals’ general sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., political orientation) and coronavirus-related behavior (Study 1). At the population level, trust in science interacts with scientific knowledge and health literacy to form homogeneous subgroups of individuals, with groups characterized by lower levels of trust in science exhibiting lower levels of health-promoting behavior and evidence-based behavior related to COVID-19 (Study 2). Trust in science varies considerably between individuals. Higher levels of trust in science are reported by those with lower levels of political conservatism, religiosity, and conspiracy ideation, as well as higher levels of openness to experience and intellectual humility. On the other hand, education level and reflective thinking are not significant predictors of trust in science (Study 3). Differences in health behavior between people with varying degrees of trust in science can, at least partly, be explained by differences in their responses to health communication containing behavioral guidelines. In the case of controversial topics, such as COVID-19, individuals with low trust in science are more likely to experience psychological reactance during exposure to health-related messages, which, in turn, contributes to less favorable attitudes and behavioral intentions. Such negative reactions can be mitigated with thoughtful, less freedom-threatening health communication (Study 4).
Our findings thus consistently support the notion that trust in science is an important determinant of health behavior. As it plays a particularly vital role in the case of uncertain, emotionally charged, and personally relevant topics, strengthening trust in science with carefully planned endeavors may contribute to creating a society capable of adapting to future health and other crises. At the same time, our research raises some new research questions, such as questions regarding the generalizability of the observed associations to other cultural contexts, effective ways of promoting trust in science, and transferability of our findings from the health context to other global challenges (e.g., climate change)
