How scientists’ collective climate advocacy affects public trust in scientists and voting behavior

Abstract Scientists increasingly engage in policy advocacy, especially on climate change. Does this advocacy undermine—or bolster—public trust in scientists and support for scientists’ recommendations? We leveraged a unique opportunity to answer this question in a real-world setting: the 2023 referendum for the Swiss climate protection law (CPL), which was supported by a public statement of 252 renowned scientists across disciplines. We conducted a pre-registered, two-wave, quasi-field experiment ( n pre-vote = 1,622, n post-vote = 891) to test how scientists’ collective support for the law affected public trust in scientists and voting behavior. We found that scientists’ advocacy was associated with greater public trust, particularly among left-leaning individuals; only a minority viewed these scientists as not objective. However, perceptions of scientists’ role in society and policymaking and voting behavior remained largely unaffected when participants were reminded of the CPL advocacy. Although we studied a restrained form of policy advocacy in a somewhat unique setting, our study challenges the widespread assumption that policy advocacy undermines public trust in scientists.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Research Letters
Published
2024-12-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad984c
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Climate Change Communication and Perception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.26

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How scientists’ collective climate advocacy affects public trust in scientists and voting behavior

Eri Bertsou, Lauren Howe, Niels G. Mede, Jamie L. Gloor et al.
2 citations
Environmental Research Letters
Climate Change Communication and Perception
2.26
article

How scientists’ collective climate advocacy affects public trust in scientists and voting behavior

Eri Bertsou, Lauren Howe, Niels G. Mede, Jamie L. Gloor, Viktoria Cologna, Mike S. Schäfer, Reto Knutti, Jana Freundt, Наоми Орескес
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Scientists increasingly engage in policy advocacy, especially on climate change. Does this advocacy undermine—or bolster—public trust in scientists and support for scientists’ recommendations? We leveraged a unique opportunity to answer this question in a real-world setting: the 2023 referendum for the Swiss climate protection law (CPL), which was supported by a public statement of 252 renowned scientists across disciplines. We conducted a pre-registered, two-wave, quasi-field experiment ( n pre-vote = 1,622, n post-vote = 891) to test how scientists’ collective support for the law affected public trust in scientists and voting behavior. We found that scientists’ advocacy was associated with greater public trust, particularly among left-leaning individuals; only a minority viewed these scientists as not objective. However, perceptions of scientists’ role in society and policymaking and voting behavior remained largely unaffected when participants were reminded of the CPL advocacy. Although we studied a restrained form of policy advocacy in a somewhat unique setting, our study challenges the widespread assumption that policy advocacy undermines public trust in scientists.

Environmental Research LettersVol. 20(1)
Harvard University (US), Zurich University of Applied Sciences in Business Administration (CH), University of Zurich (CH), University of St.Gallen (CH), Harvard University Press (US), ETH Zurich (CH), Collegium Helveticum (CH), Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts (CH)
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Climate Change Communication and Perception
2.26
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.