RAPID: Influence on Beliefs in Non-Scientific Theories

与流行的负面观点相反，公开支持非科学理论并不仅仅是极端主义者和偏执狂的领域。很大一部分公众会承认至少相信一件在科学界最受欢迎的事情。对于一个局外人来说，一个特定的理论可能看起来不合理，但这并不排除它在社会或政治上产生影响的潜力。因此，必须了解这些态度的来源，以便制定战略，尽量减少其传播。然而，研究人员面临的一个问题是，许多非科学观点在评估受访者对它们的信仰的调查开始之前就已经被政治化了。此外，研究人员不可能预见到精英们毫不含糊地支持一种大多数科学家都不会支持的“理论”的罕见情况。因此，很难理清精英暗示、党派偏见等的因果关系。目前的研究将重新采访一组调查受访者（以前在2017年采访过）和一组新的受访者，以衡量他们对一个不受科学家支持的理论的态度在过去两年中（在非科学观点被精英推广之前和之后）发生了什么变化。这项研究将使PI能够测试随着时间的推移支持非科学观点的变化。鉴于非科学观点的重要性和突出性，沿着公众接受非科学观点可能造成的破坏，本研究获得的知识将有助于减轻非科学观点的影响。在这个建议中，我们经验性地测试了一个人对非科学观点的支持如何随着时间的推移而变化。我们将重新采访一组以前采访过的调查受访者，以利用自2017年以来的变化。此外，我们将调查一组新的受访者，并随机分配他们收到的有关观点的信息。这些设计的结合将使我们能够测试几个理论上的假设，一个人的倾向和信息环境的交集如何创造支持非科学的观点，以及这些观点如何可能成为政治化。这个奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并已被认为是值得通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估的支持。

Contrary to the popular negative depictions, public endorsement of non-scientific theories are not solely the domain of extremists and paranoids. A large proportion of the public will admit to believing in at least one matter that most in the scientific community disparage. To an outside observer, a particular theory may seem irrational, but that does not preclude its potential to be socially or politically consequential. As a result, it is vital to understand where these attitudes come from in order to develop strategies to minimize their spread. A problem researchers face, however, is that many non-scientific views have already become politicized before surveys assessing respondents' beliefs in them are fielded. Moreover, it is impossible for researchers to anticipate the rare situations in which elites unambiguously endorse a "theory" that most scientists would not endorse. As such, it is difficult to disentangle the causal effects of elite cues, partisanship, and the like. The current research will re-interview a set of survey respondents (previously interviewed in 2017) and a set of new respondents to gauge how their attitudes about a theory not supported by scientists has changed in the last two years (before and after the non-scientific perspective became promoted by elites). This research will enable the PIs to test over time changes in support for a non-scientific views. Given the importance and prominence, along with the disruption, possibly caused by public acceptance of non-scientific views, the knowledge gained in this research will enable efforts to mitigate the effects of non-scientific views. In this proposal, we empirically test how an individual's support of a non-scientific view changes over time. We will re-interview a set of previously interviewed survey respondents to leverage changes since 2017. Additionally, we will survey a set of new respondents and randomize the information about the view they receive. The combination of these designs will enable us to test several theoretically motivated hypotheses about how the intersection of a person's predispositions and the information environment create support for non-scientific views and how these views may become politicized.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.