Quissell Et. Al Political and Psychological Antecedents To
Panel T07-P16 Session 1 Draft Please do not circulate Political and psychological antecedents to science denialism Kathryn Quissell, PhD, MPH, MSc Catherine Strawley, MPH Maslyn Pessner Key words: Denialism, evidence, policy, governance Introduction Science denialism is a social and political force with significant implications for the world’s ability to govern some of the most pressing global problems. Denialism has contributed to massive failures in managing the COVID-19 pandemic, hundreds of thousands of lives lost to HIV/AIDS, and barriers to domestic climate change mitigation policies and the negotiation of global treaties and agreements. Political forces clearly shape the willingness of individuals to consider, use, or reject scientific data. Using the U.S. as an example, we see many concerning population trends which erode or lessen compliance with evidence-based policymaking. Distrust of expertise and of government are at an all-time high (Gauchet 2012; Motta 2017). Anti-intellectualism, generally defined as “a resentment and suspicion of the life of the mind and of those who are considered to represent it” has become more pronounced due to the rise of right-wing populism, the political dominance of libertarian ideology, and the cultural valoriZation of the self-made man (Hofstadter 1963), all conditions exacerbated under the Trump administration. Clearer ideological sorting into political parties, reified political identities, intensifying ingroup vs. outgroup dynamics between parties, and structural incentives favoring political wins over governing are increasingly polarizing politicians and the American electorate (Klein 2020). These dynamics are coinciding with the most significant pandemic in over one hundred years and have contributed to the rejection of public health evidence and the disastrous U.S.
[Show full text]