Phys.org reports:
If scientists want the public to trust their research suggestions, they may want to appear a bit "warmer," according to a new review published by Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.
The review, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), shows that while Americans view scientists as competent, they are not entirely trusted. This may be because they are not perceived to be friendly or warm.
[...]
Focusing on scientific communication, Fiske and Dupree administered another online survey asking adults to describe public attitudes toward climate scientists specifically to provide a clearer picture of the public's seemingly mixed feelings. The researchers used a seven-scale item of distrust that included motives derived from pilot work on scientists' alleged motives. These included such motives as lying with statistics, complicating a story, showing superiority, gaining research money and pursuing a liberal agenda, among others.
The abstract for the paper can be found here.
Although distrust is low, the apparent motive to gain research money is distrusted. The literature on climate science communicators agrees that the public trusts impartiality, not persuasive agendas. Overall, communicator credibility needs to address both expertise and trustworthiness. Scientists have earned audiences’ respect, but not necessarily their trust. Discussing, teaching, and sharing information can earn trust to show scientists’ trustworthy intentions.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Wootery on Tuesday September 23 2014, @01:53PM
Ha! No.
Studies funded by a party with a clear 'desired outcome' are very often conducted to favour the stance of the sponsoring party.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 23 2014, @10:47PM
conducted to favour the stance of the sponsoring party
Science, properly done, has other folks repeating the experiment and seeing whether they get the same result.
The Utah "cold fusion" claims are an example of the Scientific Method working well.
Medical studies are another facet that demonstrates an orthogonal approach.
If the study of a new pill shows the opposite of the desired results, that study will not be publish and will instead be buried.
If a cop or prosecutor [wikipedia.org] pulled that crap (in a properly working society), he'd be blackballed.
-- gewg_