Contributor: Beth Oates, Chapter President
During global health crises and science-based issues, the voices of mistrust of science and scientists feels deafening. Often times, this is because members of the public consider scientists responsible in some way. Other times, there is a sense that scientists are unwilling to accelerate the scientific process to help the suffering. As a scientist, my mentors have always stressed the importance of “good” and “reproducible” science. Like most scientists, our credibility and the integrity of our work is of the utmost importance. Our names are directly below the titles of our papers, meaning that we have approved the validity and rigor of not only our results, but also the process by which we obtained those results. In this recent article by the Pew Research Institute, they share data that shows individuals with higher levels of education are, on average, more willing to trust research. Additionally, the survey found that 48% of respondents believed medical doctors provide fair and accurate information all or most of the time while only 32% believed medical research scientists of the same field do the same. Although the article only presents the data and does not go as far as to identify why these disparities exist, it does clearly illustrate a need within the scientific community to become more approachable and transparent about our research. We can all begin taking small steps in our own lives and research:
We are not better or above people that have less education or lack scientific backgrounds. If people do not understand why our research is important and can be trusted, that is OUR problem not theirs.
It is imperative for trainees and early career scientists to learn to be transparent in all aspects of their research. Be honest, admit mistakes, and trust in yourselves. Only then will others trust you. Our own recent history of research misconduct in this country illustrates just how easy it is to permanently damage public trust.
Interact with your community. You are part of a community that wants to know and understand how your research helps/affects them. These opportunities can be as small as talking with your neighbor or a community science night.
I understand it’s hard to not feel personally attacked during periods of public mistrust. However, we need to understand it’s not a personal. Mistrust is learned. As a scientific community, we need to rebuild trust, and we can do that by generating dialogue in our communities.