Cargando…
Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic
Scientific reasoning and trust in science are two facets of science understanding. This paper examines the contribution of science understanding, over and above analytic thinking, to the endorsement of conspiracy and pseudoscientific beliefs about COVID-19 and behavioral intentions to engage in the...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9876755/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36718393 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04284-y |
_version_ | 1784878233054871552 |
---|---|
author | Čavojová, Vladimíra Šrol, Jakub Ballová Mikušková, Eva |
author_facet | Čavojová, Vladimíra Šrol, Jakub Ballová Mikušková, Eva |
author_sort | Čavojová, Vladimíra |
collection | PubMed |
description | Scientific reasoning and trust in science are two facets of science understanding. This paper examines the contribution of science understanding, over and above analytic thinking, to the endorsement of conspiracy and pseudoscientific beliefs about COVID-19 and behavioral intentions to engage in the recommended preventive behavior. We examined the direct and indirect effects of science understanding on normative health behavior in a representative sample of the Slovak population (N = 1024). The results showed more support for the indirect pathway: individuals with a better understanding of science generally had fewer epistemically suspect beliefs and as a consequence tended to behave more in line with the evidence-based guidelines and get vaccinated. Neither scientific reasoning nor trust in science directly predicted non-compliance with preventive measures, but analytic thinking correlated positively with non-compliance with preventive measures. The strongest predictor of epistemically suspect beliefs was trust in science, which also directly predicted the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Therefore, reasoning about which experts or sources to believe (second-order scientific reasoning) has become more important than directly evaluating the original evidence (first-order scientific reasoning). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-023-04284-y. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9876755 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98767552023-01-26 Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic Čavojová, Vladimíra Šrol, Jakub Ballová Mikušková, Eva Curr Psychol Article Scientific reasoning and trust in science are two facets of science understanding. This paper examines the contribution of science understanding, over and above analytic thinking, to the endorsement of conspiracy and pseudoscientific beliefs about COVID-19 and behavioral intentions to engage in the recommended preventive behavior. We examined the direct and indirect effects of science understanding on normative health behavior in a representative sample of the Slovak population (N = 1024). The results showed more support for the indirect pathway: individuals with a better understanding of science generally had fewer epistemically suspect beliefs and as a consequence tended to behave more in line with the evidence-based guidelines and get vaccinated. Neither scientific reasoning nor trust in science directly predicted non-compliance with preventive measures, but analytic thinking correlated positively with non-compliance with preventive measures. The strongest predictor of epistemically suspect beliefs was trust in science, which also directly predicted the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Therefore, reasoning about which experts or sources to believe (second-order scientific reasoning) has become more important than directly evaluating the original evidence (first-order scientific reasoning). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-023-04284-y. Springer US 2023-01-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9876755/ /pubmed/36718393 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04284-y Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2023, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Article Čavojová, Vladimíra Šrol, Jakub Ballová Mikušková, Eva Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic |
title | Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic |
title_full | Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic |
title_fullStr | Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic |
title_full_unstemmed | Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic |
title_short | Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic |
title_sort | scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the covid-19 pandemic |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9876755/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36718393 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04284-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cavojovavladimira scientificreasoningisassociatedwithrejectionofunfoundedhealthbeliefsandadherencetoevidencebasedregulationsduringthecovid19pandemic AT sroljakub scientificreasoningisassociatedwithrejectionofunfoundedhealthbeliefsandadherencetoevidencebasedregulationsduringthecovid19pandemic AT ballovamikuskovaeva scientificreasoningisassociatedwithrejectionofunfoundedhealthbeliefsandadherencetoevidencebasedregulationsduringthecovid19pandemic |