This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Evans, G. Articles by Durant, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain

Centre for European Studies, Nuffield College, Oxford OX1 1NF, UK

John Durant

Imperial College London, Science Museum, London SW7 5NH. UK

The belief that greater understanding leads to more positive attitudes informs many practical initiatives in the public understanding of science. However, there has been comparatively little empirical study of the justification for this belief. This paper explores the relationship between understanding of science and levels of support for science using a national sample of over 2000 British respondents. The analysis indicates that the internal consistency of attitudes towards science is poor, and that the links between attitudes towards science in general and attitudes towards specific areas of scientific research are weak. Understanding of science is weakly related to more positive attitudes in general: but, more significantly, it is also associated with more coherent and more discriminating attitudes. Of particular importance is the finding that while knowledgeable members of the public are more favourably disposed towards science in general, they are less supportive of morally contentious areas of research than are those who are less knowledgeable. Although an informed public opinion is likely to provide a slightly more supportive popular basis for some areas of scientific research, it could serve to constrain research in controversial areas such as human embryology.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 4, No. 1, 57-74 (1995)
DOI: 10.1088/0963-6625/4/1/004


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Stares Using Latent Class Models to Explore Cross-national Typologies of Public Engagement with Science and Technology in Europe Science Technology and Society, July 1, 2009; 14(2): 289 - 329. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Whitmarsh What's in a name? Commonalities and differences in public understanding of "climate change" and "global warming" Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 2009; 18(4): 401 - 420. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. Meisenberg Designer babies on tap? Medical students' attitudes to pre-implantation genetic screening Public Understanding of Science, March 1, 2009; 18(2): 149 - 166. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. A. Maeseele, G. Verleye, I. Stevens, and A. Speckhard Psychosocial resilience in the face of a mediated terrorist threat Media, War & Conflict, April 1, 2008; 1(1): 50 - 69. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Allum, P. Sturgis, D. Tabourazi, and I. Brunton-Smith Science knowledge and attitudes across cultures: a meta-analysis Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2008; 17(1): 35 - 54. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. W. Bauer, N. Allum, and S. Miller What can we learn from 25 years of PUS survey research? Liberating and expanding the agenda Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2007; 16(1): 79 - 95. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. F. Durant and J. S. Legge Jr. "Wicked Problems," Public Policy, and Administrative Theory: Lessons From the GM Food Regulatory Arena Administration Society, July 1, 2006; 38(3): 309 - 334. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. C. von Roten Do we need a public understanding of statistics? Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2006; 15(2): 243 - 249. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Fisher, B. Small, H. Roth, M. Mallon, and B. Jerebine What do individuals in different science groups within a life sciences organization think about genetic modification? Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 2005; 14(3): 317 - 326. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. F. Durant and J. S. Legge Jr Public Opinion, Risk Perceptions, and Genetically Modified Food Regulatory Policy: Reassessing the Calculus of Dissent among European Citizens European Union Politics, June 1, 2005; 6(2): 181 - 200. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. C. Sanderson, J. Wardle, and S. Michie The effects of a genetic information leaflet on public attitudes towards genetic testing Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2005; 14(2): 213 - 224. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Pardo and F. Calvo The Cognitive Dimension of Public Perceptions of Science: Methodological Issues Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 2004; 13(3): 203 - 227. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. C. von Roten Gender Differences in Attitudes toward Science in Switzerland Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2004; 13(2): 191 - 199. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Edwards Evaluating European Public Awareness of Science Initiatives: A Review of the Literature Science Communication, March 1, 2004; 25(3): 260 - 271. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Sturgis and N. Allum Science in Society: Re-Evaluating the Deficit Model of Public Attitudes Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2004; 13(1): 55 - 74. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. W. Burns, D. J. O'Connor, and S. M. Stocklmayer Science Communication: A Contemporary Definition Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2003; 12(2): 183 - 202. [PDF]

				R. Pardo and F. Calvo Attitudes toward science among the European public: a methodological analysis Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2002; 11(2): 155 - 195. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. V. Lewenstein Editorial: A decade of Public Understanding Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2002; 11(1): 1 - 4. [PDF]

				A. K. Wolfe, D. J. Bjornstad, M. Russell, and N. D. Kerchner A Framework for Analyzing Dialogues over the Acceptability of Controversial Technologies Science Technology Human Values, January 1, 2002; 27(1): 134 - 159. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. CLARK and D. L. ILLMAN Dimensions of Civic Science: Introductory Essay Science Communication, September 1, 2001; 23(1): 5 - 27. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Yearley Computer Models and the Public's Understanding of Science: A Case-Study Analysis Social Studies of Science, December 1, 1999; 29(6): 845 - 866. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. J. Frewer, C. Howard, D. Hedderley, and R. Shepherd Reactions to information about genetic engineering: impact of source characteristics, perceived personal relevance, and persuasiveness Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 1999; 8(1): 35 - 50. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. D. Miller The measurement of civic scientific literacy Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 1998; 7(3): 203 - 223. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Hagedorn and S. Allender-Hagedorn Issues in agricultural and environmental biotechnology: identifying and comparing biotechnology issues from public opinion surveys, the popular press and technical/regulatory sources Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 1997; 6(3): 233 - 245. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. Torgersen and F. Seifert Aversion preceding rejection: results of the Eurobarometer Survey 39.1 on biotechnology and genetic engineering in Austria Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 1997; 6(2): 131 - 142. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Havard Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences Public Understanding of Science, October 1, 1996; 5(4): 321 - 330. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Hutton Interactions between the formal UK school science curriculum and the public understanding of science Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 1996; 5(1): 41 - 53. [Abstract] [PDF]