Smart but Evil? Student-Teachers’ Perception of Educational Researchers’ Epistemic Trustworthiness

Abstract

In-service and preservice teachers are increasingly required to integrate research results into their classroom practice. However, due to their limited methodological background knowledge, they often cannot evaluate scientific evidence firsthand and instead must trust the sources on which they rely. In two experimental studies, we investigated the amount of this so-called epistemic trustworthiness (dimensions expertise, integrity, and benevolence) that student-teachers ascribe to the authors of texts who present classical research findings (e.g., learning with worked-out examples) that allegedly were written by a practitioner, an expert, or a scientist. Results from the first exploratory study suggest that student-teachers view scientists as “smart but evil,” since they rate them as having substantially more expertise than practitioners, while also being less benevolent and lacking in integrity. Moreover, results from the exploratory study suggest that evaluativistic epistemic beliefs (beliefs about the nature of knowledge) predict epistemic trustworthiness. A preregistered conceptual replication study (Study 2) provided more evidence for the “smart but evil” stereotype. Further directions of research as well as implications for practice are discussed.

Replication is important for educational psychology: Recent developments and key issues

“…The first author once testified before a state senate education committee and was surprised to hear senators sarcastically noting that researchers can make their studies say whatever they want. From an empirical perspective, Merk and Rosman (2019) found evidence that student-teachers held a "smart but evil" stereotype about education researchers, "as the authors of scientific studies … are perceived not only as less benevolent, with less integrity, but also as having more expertise in contrast to practitioners. This is an intriguing finding, as it suggests that student-teachers hold a kind of distrust in scientists" (p. 6).…”

Preregistration and Registered Reports

“…(2020) recently edited a Special Topic for AERA Open which published some of the first registered reports in educational psychology, including findings on student-teacher relationships (Robinson, Scott & Gotfried, 2019), pre-service teacher perceptions of researcher trustworthiness (Merk & Rosman, 2019), text framings for nudges to improve college matriculation (Kramer, 2020), and identification policies for gifted education assignment (Peters et al, 2019).…”

Teacher’s Reasons for Trust and Distrust in Scientific Evidence: Reflecting a “Smart But Evil” Stereotype?

“…In line with such arguments, Merk and Rosman (2019) found what they subsequently called the "smart but evil" stereotype: In two experimental studies, they showed that preservice teachers view educational researchers' expertise as 2 significantly higher than their integrity and benevolence compared with their views on practitioners (i.e., in-service teachers). While it is still disputed whether comparably lower-but still high-integrity and benevolence ascriptions may indeed be labeled as "evil" (Hendriks et al, 2021), Hendriks et al (2021) found additional (partial) support for a smart but evil pattern in preservice teachers: When following the epistemic aim of acquiring theoretical explanations in a teaching context, they saw researchers as having more expertise and integrity but less benevolence compared with practitioners.…”