金兼斌,楚亚杰

• 1:清华大学新闻与传播学院

摘要(Abstract)：

当下中国,"科学"与"民意"不断碰撞。本研究考察公众对科学家群体的信任状况及其影响因素。研究发现,公众科学素养的不同维度,对科学家的总体信任和特定议题(即本文中的转基因议题)上的信任呈现明显差异;对传统媒介中科技资讯的关注程度,对两种信任均有显著的正向影响;科技报道兴趣、社会网络情况,只与总体信任有关;对社会大多数人的一般信任,正向预测了两类信任。本文最后讨论了这些结果包含的理论含义与现实意义。

关键词(KeyWords)： 社会信任;科学素养;媒介使用;社会网络

Abstract:

Keywords:

基金项目(Foundation):

作者(Author): 金兼斌,楚亚杰

DOI: 10.16602/j.gmj.20150005

参考文献(References)：

• 陈刚(2014):“不确定性”的沟通:“转基因争议”传播的议题竞争、话语秩序与媒介的知识再生产,《新闻与传播研究》,第7期,17-34页。
• 范敬群、贾鹤鹏、艾熠、彭光芒(2014):转基因争议中媒体报道因素的影响评析——对SSCI数据库21年相关文献研究的系统分析,《西南大学学报(社会科学版)》,第4期,133-141页。
• 胡安宁、周怡(2013):一般信任模式的跨部门差异及其中介机制——基于2010年中国综合社会调查的研究,《社会》,第4期,60-82页。
• 胡荣、胡康(2008):城乡居民社会资本构成的差异,《厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,第6期,64-70页。
• 金兼斌(2002年8月):科学素养的概念及其测量,科技传播与社会发展——中国科技新闻学会第七次学术年会暨第五届全国科技传播研讨会,大连。
• 李涛、黄纯纯、何兴强、周开国(2008):什么影响了居民的社会信任水平?——来自广东省的经验证据,《经济研究》,第1期,137-152页。
• 林聚任(2007):《社会信任和社会资本重建——当前乡村社会关系研究》,济南:山东人民出版社。
• 王飞雪、山岸俊男(1999):信任的中、日、美比较研究,《社会学研究》,第2期,67-82页。
• 杨明、孟天广、方然(2011):变迁社会中的社会信任:存量与变化1990—2010年,《北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,第6期,100-109页。
• 耶利(2006):“公众理解科学”中的科学是什么意思?德尔克斯、冯·格罗特(编):《在理解与信赖之间:公众,科学与技术》(田松等译),150-164页,北京:北京理工大学出版社。(原书Dierkes,M.&von Grote,C.(Eds)[2000].Between\sunderstanding and trust:the public,science and technology.London and New\sYork:Routledge.)
• 张苙云、谭康荣(2005):制度信任的趋势与结构:“多重等级评量”的分析策略,《台湾社会学刊》,第35期,75-126页。
• 周慧(2012):公众对转基因食品的认知研究,华中农业大学硕士论文。
• 邹宇春、敖丹、李建栋(2012):中国城市居民的信任格局及社会资本影响——以广州为例,《中国社会科学》,第5期,131-148页。
• Allum,N.,Sturgis,P.,Tabourazi,D.,&Brunton-Smith,I.(2008).Science\sknowledge and attitudes across cultures:a meta-analysis.Public Understanding\sof Science,17(1),35-54.doi:10.1177/0963662506070159
• Barnes,B.(2005).The credibility of scientific expertise in a culture of suspicion.Interdisciplinary Science Reviews,30(1),11-18.doi:10.1179/030801805X25882
• Bauer,M.(2000).“Science in the Media”as a Cultural Indicator:Contextualizing\sSurveys with Media Analysis.In Dierkes,M.&von Grote,C.(Eds),Between understanding and trust:the public,science and technology(108-123).London and New York:Routledge.
• Buys,L.,Aird,R.,van Megen,K.,Miller,E.,&Sommerfeld,J.(2014).Perceptions of climate change and trust in information providers in rural\sAustralia.Public Understanding of Science,23(2),170-188.doi:10.1177/0963662512449948
• Critchley,C.(2008).Public opinion and trust in scientists:The role of the research\scontext,and the perceived motivation of stem cell researchers.Public\sUnderstanding of Science,17(3),309-327.doi:10.1177/0963662506070162
• Delgado,A.(2010).Activist trust:the diffusion of green expertise in a Brazilian landscape.Public Understanding of Science,19(5),562-577.doi:10.1177/0963662508098578
• Durant,J.,Evans,G.,&Thomas,G.(1989)The public understanding of\sscience.Nature,340,11-14.
• Durant,J.(1994).What is scientific literacy?.European Review,2(1),83-89.doi:10.1017/S1062798700000922
• Durant,J.,Bauer,M.,Gaskell,G.,Midden,C.,Liakopoulos,M.,&Scholten,E.(2000).Two Cultures of Public Understanding of Science and Technology in\sEurope.In Dierkes,M.&von Grote,C.(Eds),Between understanding and\strust:The public,science and technology(89-107).London and New York:Routledge.
• Dutton,W.H.&Shepherd,A.(2006).Trust in the Internet as an experience\stechnology.Information,Communication&Society,9(4),433-451.doi:10.1080/13691180600858606
• Einsiedel,E.(1994).Mental maps of science:Knowledge and attitudes among\sCanadian adults.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,6(1),35-44.doi:10.1093/ijpor/6.1.35
• Engdahl,E.&Lidskog,R.(2014).Risk,communication and trust:Towards an\semotional understanding of trust.Public Understanding of Science,23(6),703-717.doi:10.1177/0963662512460953
• Evans,G.&Durant,J.(1995).The relationship between knowledge and attitudes\sin the public understanding of science in Britain.Public Understanding of\sScience,4(1),57-74.doi:10.1088/0963-6625/4/1/004
• Friedman,S.,Dunwoody,S.,&Rogers,C.(1986).Scientists and journalists:Reporting science as news.New York:Free Press.
• Gaskell,G.,Allum,N.C.,Wagner,W.,Hviid Nielsen,T.,Jelsoe,E.,Kohring,M.&Bauer,M.(2001).In the Public Eye:Representations of\sBiotechnology in Europe.In Gaskell,G.&Bauer,M.(Eds).Biotechnology1996—2000:the years of controversy(53-79).London:Science Museum\sPublications.
• Gauchat,G.(2010).The politicization of science in the public sphere.PhDdissertation,University of Connecticut,Storrs,U.S.A.
• Gerbner,G.,Gross,L.,&Signorielli.N.(1981).Scientists on the TV screen.Culture and Society,18(4),41-44.doi:10.1007/BF02701349
• Giddens,A.(1990).The consequences of modernity.Stanford:Stanford University\sPress.
• Grove-White,R.,Macnaghten,P.,&Wynne,B.(2000).Wising Up:The Public\sand New Technologies.Lancaster:Centre for the Study of Environmental\sChange,Lancaster University.
• Hardin,R.(2001).Conceptions and explanations of trust.In Cook,K.(Ed.),Trust in Society(3-40).New York:Russell Sage Foundation.
• Ho,S.,Scheufele,D.,&Corley,E.(2013).Factors influencing public risk-benefitconsiderations of nanotechnology:Assessing the effects of mass media,interpersonal\scommunication,and elaborative processing.Public Understanding of Science,22(5),606-623.doi:10.1177/0963662511417936
• Inglehart,R.(1990).Cultural shift in advanced societies.Princeton:Princeton\sUniversity Press.
• LaFollette,M.(1990).Making science our own:Public images of science,1910—1955.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
• Liu,H.&Priest,S.(2009).Understanding public support for stem cell research:media communication,interpersonal communication and trust in key actors.Public\sUnderstanding of Science,18(6),704-718.doi:10.1177/0963662508097625
• Luhmann,N.(1979).Trust and power.New York:John Wiley and Sons.
• MacKenzie,D.(1999).The certainty trough.In:Dutton W.H.(Ed.),Society on\sthe Line(43-46).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
• Michael,M.(1992).Lay discourses of science:Science-in-general,science-inparticular,and self.Science,Technology and Human Values,17,313-333.doi:10.1177/016224399201700303
• Miller,J.(1983).Scientific Literacy:A Conceptual and Empirical Review.Daedalus,112(2),29-48.
• Miller,J.(1987).Scientific literacy in the United States.In:Evered,D.and\sO'Connor,M.(Eds),Communicating Science to the Public(19-37).London:Wiley&Sons.
• Miller,J.(2004).Public understanding of,and attitudes toward,scientific\sresearch:What we know and what we need to know.Public Understanding of\sScience,13(3),273-294.doi:10.1177/0963662504044908
• Nelkin,D.(1995).Selling science:How the press covers science and technology.New York:W.H.Freeman.
• Nisbet,M.,Scheufele,D.,Shanahan,J.,Moy,P.,Brossard,D.,&Lewenstein,B.(2002).Knowledge,reservations,or promise?A media effects model for\spublic perceptions of science and technology.Communication Research,29(5),584-608.doi:10.1177/009365002236196
• Pardo,R.&Calvo,F.(2002).Attitudes toward Science among the European\sPublic:a Methodological Analysis.Public Understanding of Science,11(2),155-95.doi:10.1088/0963-6625/11/2/305
• Phillips,L.,Carvalho,A.,&Doyle,J.(Eds)(2012).Citizen voices:performing\spublic participation in science and environment communication.Bristol,UK/Chicago:Intellect.
• Priest,S.(2001).Misplaced faith:Communication variables as predictors of\sencouragement for biotechnology development.Science Communication,23(2):97-110.doi:10.1177/1075547001023002002
• Roberts,M.,Reid,G.,Schroeder,M.,&Norris,S.(2013).Causal or spurious?The\srelationship of knowledge and attitudes to trust in science and technology.Public\sUnderstanding of Science,22(5),624-641.doi:10.1177/0963662511420511
• Sturgis,P.&Allum,N.(2004).Science in society:Re-evaluating the defict model of\spublic attitudes.Public Understanding of Science,13(1),55-74.doi:10.1177/0963662504042690
• Van de Velde,L.,Verbeke,W.,Popp,M.,&Van Huylenbroeck,G.(2011).Trust and perception related to information about biofuels in Belgium.Public\sUnderstanding of Science,20(5),595-608.doi:10.1177/0963662509358641
• Wynne,B.(2001).Creating public alienation:expert cultures of risk and ethics on\sGMOs.Science as Culture,10(4),445-481.doi:10.1080/09505430120093586
• Yamamoto,Y.(2012).Values,objectivity and credibility of scientists in a contentious\snatural resource debate.Public Understanding of Science,21(1),101-125.doi:10.1177/0963662510371435
• Yearley,S.(2005).Making sense of science.London:Sage.
• 1这两道测试题是:题1:“两个科学家想知道一种治疗高血压的药物是否有效。第一位科学家将药分给1000个高血压病人服用,然后观察有多少个病人的血压有所下降;第二位科学家则将高血压病人分成两组,第一组500人服药,另一组500个病人则不服药,观察这两组病人中血压下降情况如何。请问,第一位和第二位科学家中,哪一位的方法测试药的效果更有效?”被访者回答“第一位”或“不知道”记为错,答“第二位”记为对,全体被访者中该题正确率为83.3%。题2:“医生告诉一对夫妇,由于他们具有相同的病态基因,如果他们生育1个孩子,这个孩子患遗传病的机会为1/4。以下说法,您认为是否正确:a.如果他们生育3个孩子,那么,这3个孩子都不会得遗传病。b.如果他们的第一个孩子有遗传病,那么后面的3个孩子将不会得遗传病。c.如果前面3个孩子都很健康,那么第四个孩子肯定有遗传病。d.他们的孩子都可能得遗传病。”被访者a、b、c3 项回答“正确”和“不知道”记为错,回答“不正确”记为对,d项则相反。经计算,全体被访者中本题答对全部4项的占66.4%,答对3项的占11.7%,答对2项的占8.5%,答对1项的占8.1%,全部答错的仅占5.3%。