At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, scientific guidance was constantly changing — there were different recommendations on the efficacy of masks, different numbers for how far COVID-19 droplets could travel, and different advice on medicines. And later on in the pandemic, when the science converged, many people no longer trusted what scientists were telling them.

Most Astrobites readers don’t work in medicine, but this story is still important to our lives as physicists and astronomers — and more broadly, as scientists. Fostering trust in science is vital for creating a stronger and more informed world community. The public needs to understand what scientific results mean (and don’t mean) so they can make informed decisions about their lives. As astronomers, we might not do science that affects people’s health and wellness, but we can help educate the public about how science works and help them interpret scientific information.

‘Trusting’ science isn’t the same as blindly following it

When I say that we should foster trust in science, I don’t mean that the world should unquestioningly believe scientific results. “What we should not do is aim for uncritical trust and belief among the public in science,” said Pramod Khargonekar, the vice chancellor for research at UC Irvine. “That would be counter to the core principles of the scientific method, which relies upon evidence, testing, analysis, debate, skepticism, objectivity, and so on and so forth.”

Healthy skepticism is how science progresses. As researchers, we practice this every day. When we read papers for a journal club, we don’t just explain the results of the study — we also question the study’s methods, assumptions, and conclusions, and talk about ways that the science could have been done better. 

We also understand that the existence of one research paper on a certain topic doesn’t mean that an “answer” has been reached — science is a conversation, and something that is accepted as the truth today could be superseded by a ‘truer’ truth tomorrow. This is a sign of healthy science: increased evidence should lead to more research and improved understanding. And when many scientists start coming to the same result — like how the vast majority of scientists agree that human-driven climate change is real — we reach scientific consensus, and we can reasonably believe that our conclusion is true. If scientists didn’t go through this process of questioning themselves, we might still think that the Earth was the center of the universe! 

Researchers understand that this is how science works, but this nuance gets lost when science is communicated to the world. Every day, our phones are bombarded with conflicting articles about scientific results, with news notifications saying things like “study shows that eating eggs can protect brain health!” but also “study shows that eggs can increase your risk of early death!”. This is confusing for people who don’t work in science. We need to teach the public how to interpret these results. The aim isn’t for people to trust each research result, but to trust in the process of science.

As an astronomer, what can I do to help build trust in science?

Astronomers are unique! People are excited to hear about the black holes and exoplanets and space missions we work on, so we get to give talks at elementary schools, in bars (shout-out to Astronomy on Tap!), at planetariums, and more. Unlike some other scientific disciplines, we usually talk to the public in friendly, casual environments, which gives us the perfect chance to foster connections with the community and improve their trust in the scientific method.

When we talk to the public, we should talk about how we do science, instead of just sharing our exciting results. The community should hear more about the iterative process of science and the importance of peer-review. We should explain that we don’t always get the answers right, but that science is always trying to reach closer and closer to the truth. Plus, it turns out that when scientists acknowledge uncertainty in research results, public trust in scientists increases. 

As researchers who have the privilege to be funded through taxpayer money, we should also talk more about our funding. When some people hear that we are ‘funded by the National Science Foundation’ or ‘funded by NASA’, they think this means that millions of taxpayer dollars are going directly into scientists’ pockets, which makes us seem less trustworthy. This isn’t true (and it’s a common attack on climate scientists).

In reality, that money is allocated to pay for things like equipment, research-related travel, and indirect costs (money needed for ‘keeping the lights on’: the costs associated with staffing and maintaining research facilities). Grant money is used to pay researchers, but generally not more than their existing salary. For example, when applying to National Science Foundation grants, NSF “limits the salary compensation requested in the proposal budget for each senior/key person to no more than two months of their regular salary in any one year.” It’s also difficult for researchers to win grants, and applying for them takes up a lot of time — so at least in astronomy, it’s rare for people to be financially motivated to do science.

Trust doesn’t happen overnight

Above all, when talking about science with the public, it’s important to be open-minded and humble. Some community members have major reasons for not trusting science. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study and the use of Agent Orange are just a few examples of how science has harmed people. The public doesn’t owe us their trust — it’s our responsibility to earn it.

If we are continually kind, open, and informative with the public, we can help foster this trust. When combined with efforts to increase science education and literacy, this can help us nurture an informed global population that sees science as a tool for good.

Suggested further reading:

• Building Bridges, Earning Trust: The WHY and the HOW of Public Trust in Science
• Widespread distrust in science: Is the way we communicate to blame?

Astrobite edited by Drew Lapeer

Featured image credit: NPS/J. Olson