Scholarlink

<p>A&#xa0;recent debate on science skepticism in Austria portrayed the country’s population as highly skeptical of science. The actual extent of science skepticism remained unclear during the debate, and an explicit definition of it was never provided. This paper examines the phenomenon of science skepticism in Austria by reviewing studies on public perceptions of science and by applying a&#xa0;mixed methods approach, including secondary analysis of survey data and analysis of primary data from focus groups and expert interviews. Departing from different methodological perspectives, we show that degrees of criticism of science vary according to the way they are measured, that criticism can be observed in all societal groups, that individuals are not consistent in their attitudes towards science, and that critique is often directed at scientists’ presumed motives or entanglements with politics rather than at science per se. We conclude that the dualistic perspective that dominates public debates on this topic does not resonate with the empirical complexity illustrated in this paper.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Reflections on the science society relationship. A mixed-methods study on science skepticism in Austria

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年5月23日

查看全文
  • Johannes Starkbaum,
  • Erich Griessler,
  • Peter Grand,
  • Fabian Seiser,
  • Thomas König

摘要

A recent debate on science skepticism in Austria portrayed the country’s population as highly skeptical of science. The actual extent of science skepticism remained unclear during the debate, and an explicit definition of it was never provided. This paper examines the phenomenon of science skepticism in Austria by reviewing studies on public perceptions of science and by applying a mixed methods approach, including secondary analysis of survey data and analysis of primary data from focus groups and expert interviews. Departing from different methodological perspectives, we show that degrees of criticism of science vary according to the way they are measured, that criticism can be observed in all societal groups, that individuals are not consistent in their attitudes towards science, and that critique is often directed at scientists’ presumed motives or entanglements with politics rather than at science per se. We conclude that the dualistic perspective that dominates public debates on this topic does not resonate with the empirical complexity illustrated in this paper.