WHY DO WE ARGUE ABOUT SCIENCE? EXPLORING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ANTECEDENTS OF REJECTION OF SCIENCE JOHN RICHARD KERR A thesis submitted to Victoria University of Wellington for the fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Victoria University of Wellington 2020 Abstract Science is recognised and accepted as an important tool for understanding the world in which we live, yet some people hold beliefs that go against the best available scientific evidence. For example, many people believe human-caused climate change is not occurring, or that vaccines are ineffective and dangerous. Previous research has investigated a range of possible drivers of this ‘rejection of science’ (Lewandowsky, Oberauer, & Gignac, 2013), including ignorance, distrust of scientists, and ideological motivations. The studies in this thesis extend this line of inquiry, focusing first on the role of perceptions of scientific agreement. I report experimental evidence that people base their beliefs on ‘what they think scientists think’ (Study 1). However, an analysis of longitudinal data (Study 2) suggests that our personal beliefs may also skew our perceptions of scientific agreement. While the results of Study 1 and Study 2 somewhat conflict, they do converge on one finding: perceptions of consensus alone do not fully explain rejection of science. In the remainder of the thesis I cast a wider net, examining how ideological beliefs are linked to rejection of science. Study 3 draws on social media data to reveal that political ideology is associated with rejection of science in the context of who people choose to follow on the platform Twitter. A final set of studies (4, 5, and 6) examine the role of two motivational antecedents of political ideology, Right-wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), in rejection of science across five publicly debated issues. I also explore several potential mediators which might explain these effects. I report, for the first time, that RWA and SDO predict rejection of science across a range of issues and one mediator emerges as a consistent link: distrust of scientists. People who are less opposed to authoritarian (RWA) or hierarchical (SDO) values are less trusting of scientists and, in turn, more likely to reject specific scientific findings. I discuss potential strategies to address or circumvent this ideologically-motivated distrust of science. Taken as whole, this thesis extends our understanding of why people disagree with an established scientific consensus on socially important issues. Knowledge of the scientific consensus matters, but our deeper beliefs about society can also draw us closer to, or push us further from evidence-based conclusions. i Table of Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... i Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures ...........................................................................................................................v List of Tables .......................................................................................................................... vi List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ viii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................. ix Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................... 1 1.1 Thesis overview ..............................................................................................................2 Chapter 2: Rejection of Science .......................................................................... 5 2.1 Defining rejection of science ..........................................................................................5 2.2 Scope of thesis ................................................................................................................6 2.3 Examples of rejection of science ....................................................................................6 2.3.1 Climate change .....................................................................................................6 2.3.2 GM food ...............................................................................................................8 2.3.3 Vaccines ...............................................................................................................9 2.3.4 Fluoridation ........................................................................................................10 2.3.5 Evolution ............................................................................................................11 2.4 Importance of investigating rejection of science ..........................................................12 2.5 Summary .......................................................................................................................14 Chapter 3: Why Do People Reject Science? .................................................... 15 3.1 Ignorance ......................................................................................................................15 3.1.1 The Information Deficit Model ..........................................................................15 3.1.2 Awareness of consensus .....................................................................................17 3.1.3 The Gateway Belief Model ................................................................................17 3.2 General attitudes towards science .................................................................................20 3.2.1 Trust in scientists ................................................................................................20 3.3 Motivated reasoning .....................................................................................................22 3.3.1 The Attitude Roots Model ..................................................................................24 3.3.2 Attitude roots: Ideological predictors of rejection of science .............................25 3.3.3 The Dual Process Model: RWA and SDO as distal drivers of rejection of science ................................................................................................................32 3.4 Chapter summary and research questions .....................................................................41 Chapter 4: Investigating the Gateway Belief Model ....................................... 43 4.1 Preface ..........................................................................................................................43 4.2 Study 1: Changes in perceived scientific consensus shift beliefs about climate change and GM food safety ................................................................................................................44 4.2.1 Abstract ..............................................................................................................44 4.2.2 Introduction ........................................................................................................45 4.2.3 Method................................................................................................................50 4.2.4 Results ................................................................................................................52 ii 4.2.5 Discussion ..........................................................................................................59 4.3 Bridging comment ........................................................................................................64 4.4 Study 2: Perceptions of scientific consensus do not predict later beliefs about the reality of climate change: A test of the gateway belief model using cross-lagged panel analysis ....................................................................................................................................64 4.4.1 Abstract ..............................................................................................................64 4.4.2 Introduction ........................................................................................................65 4.4.3 Materials and Methods .......................................................................................66 4.4.4 Results ................................................................................................................67 4.4.5 Discussion ..........................................................................................................68 4.5 General Discussion .......................................................................................................70 Chapter 5: Politics and Science in the New Zealand Twittersphere ............. 73 5.1 Study 3 Preface .............................................................................................................73 5.2 Study 3: Political ideology and rejection of science on twitter. ...................................73 5.2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................73 5.2.2 Method................................................................................................................78 5.2.3 Results ................................................................................................................81