The 'deficit model' of public attitudes towards science has led to controversy over the role of scientific knowledge in explaining lay people's attitudes towards science. The most sustained critique has come from what we refer to as the 'contextualist' perspective. In this view, people's understanding of the ways in which science is embedded within wider political, economic and regulatory settings is fundamental for explaining their attitudes towards science. Most work adopting this perspective has relied on qualitative case studies as empirical evidence. In this paper we challenge the de facto orthodoxy that has connected the deficit model and contextualist perspectives with quantitative and qualitative research methods respectively. We simultaneously test hypotheses from both theoretical approaches using quantitative methodology. We use data from the 1996 British Social Attitudes Survey to investigate the interacting effects of different domains of scientific and contextual knowledge on public attitudes toward science. The results point to the clear importance of knowledge as a determinant of attitudes toward science. However, in contrast to the rather simplistic deficit model that has traditionally characterised discussions of this relationship, this analysis highlights the complex and interacting nature of the knowledge-attitude interface.
The correlation between knowledge and attitudes has been the source of controversy in research on the public understanding of science (PUS). Although many studies, both quantitative and qualitative, have examined this issue, the results are at best diverse and at worst contradictory. In this paper, we review the evidence on the relationship between public attitudes and public knowledge about science across 40 countries using a meta-analytic approach. We fit multilevel models to data from 193 nationally representative surveys on PUS carried out since 1989. We find a small positive correlation between general attitudes towards science and general knowledge of scientific facts, after controlling for a range of possible confounding variables. This general relationship varies little across cultures but more substantially between different domains of science and technology. Our results suggest that PUS research needs to focus on understanding the mechanisms that underlie the clear association that exists between knowledge and attitudes about science
Interprofessional education (IPE) involves students from different professions being brought together to learn about each other's profession. Several models of IPE exist, and central to the debate around which of these models is the most appropriate is the question of the stage of training in which to implement these programmes. Currently, however, there is no consensus on this question. Debate so far has revolved around the strength of professional identities, or lack thereof, amongst pre‐qualifying students and how this may influence interprofessional learning. The potential role of professional identity in IPE seems to be unresolved. The present article adds to this debate by investigating the level of professional identity when students commence their professional studies; the differences in the level of professional identity between students from a range of professions; and the factors which may affect the initial levels of professional identification. Data were collected by questionnaire from the first‐year cohort of Health and Social Care (H&SC) students embarking on IPE as an embedded part of an undergraduate pre‐qualifying programme. A sample of 1254 students was achieved. Professional identity was measured using an adaptation of a previously described scale. Our findings suggest that a degree of professional identity is evident before students begin their training. Differences in strength of initial professional identity were observed across professions, with physiotherapy students displaying the highest levels of professional identification. To test for associations between professional identity and a number of independent variables, an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression model was estimated. The variables that were found to be significant predictors of baseline professional identity were: gender; profession; previous work experience in H&SC environments; understanding of team working; knowledge of profession; and cognitive flexibility. Some explanations for these findings are presented and the implications are discussed.
This research was conducted with support from an ESRC CASE award in collaboration with the UK Home Office (Grant number: PTA-033-2005-00028). We gratefully acknowledge the three anonymous reviewers, whose comments and suggestions improved an earlier version of this paper. 2 DO NEIGHBORHOODS GENERATE FEAR OF CRIME? : AN EMPIRICAL TEST USING THE BRITISH CRIME SURVEY
We use a multi-level modeling approach to estimate the effect of ethnic diversity on measures of generalized and strategic trust using data from a new surey in Britain with a sample size approaching 25,000 individuals. In addition to the ethnic diversity of neighbourhoods, we incorporate a range of indicators of the socio-economic characteristics of individuals and the areas in which they live. Our results show no effect of ethnic diversity on generalized trust. There is a statistically significant association between diversity and a measure of strategic trust but, in substantive terms, the effect is trivial and dwarfed by the effects of economic deprivation and the social connectedness of individuals.3
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.