Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336625 
Year of Publication: 
2024
Series/Report no.: 
MIOIR Working Paper Series No. 2024/04
Publisher: 
The University of Manchester, The Manchester Institute of Innovation Research (MIoIR), Manchester
Abstract: 
Science is widely embraced as an important prerequisite for innovation, and there is widespread support for public investment in science on that basis. It remains less clear to what extent the general public also perceives science as a relevant source of expertise on technological development and innovation. Drawing on representative panels from two European countries (the United Kingdom and Sweden), we investigate whether scientists are perceived as credible senders of messages regarding future technological development and its consequences. We apply a conjoint analysis methodology. Specifically, we estimate the credibility of scientists by comparing how respondents’ assessments of societal challenges statements change with the attribution of that statement to scientists, compared with attribution to other type of expert groups (government, businesspersons, and issue advocates). While our study identifies positively framed predictions about new technology and innovation as a domain where scientific expertise is perceived as enjoying relatively high credibility, actors representing business and special interest groups are overall perceived as more credible conveyors of ‘bad news’, of negatively framed messages about the future. Implications for our understanding of the social contract of science are discussed.
Subjects: 
Scientific Experts
Expertise
Trust in Science
SDGs
Emerging Technologies
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by-sa Logo
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.