Public attitudes to science survey: Good news and bad

Ipsos Mori has published its 2011 Public Attitudes to Science survey for the Department of Business Innovation and Skills. The survey provides good news and bad. The headline results reported that people are interested in knowing more about science and technology, but that they feel they do not hear enough about science and feel less informed than they did in 2008. This provides a positive challenge to those in science communication.

Another aspect of the survey, of specific interest to those interested in public participation and dialogue about science, was that, in a variety of questions, respondents made it clear that the public should have more of a voice in science and technology. For example, two-thirds of people agree that scientists should listen more to what ordinary people think and 73% think that the Government should act in accordance with public concerns about science and technology. However, at the same time, many respondents were disinclined to get involved themselves. 50% of respondents chose ‘I would like to know that the public are consulted on science issues, but I don’t want to be involved personally’ from a list of six statements about attitudes to public consultation in science.

The difference between what people want from science consultation and what they are willing to do presents a real challenge to advocates of public dialogue. Although people feel that it is right for the public to have a say in science policy, this does not translate into feeling a responsibility or desire to take part in participation opportunities when they are available. It suggests that just providing more opportunities for public dialogue won’t necessarily increase the depth or breadth of dialogue that takes place.

Part of the answer may be to focus on how to ‘personalise’ public dialogue; explaining to individuals why their participation is important and explaining how they have much to contribute. The survey has also shown how people want to know about science itself. Therefore, it may be that building on this interest is a key pathway to encourage people to participate in dialogues about science-related policy developments as well.

The survey merits further analysis over the coming months. The results clearly show the need to involve the public in science and there is much useful information for those involved in public engagement to draw out from the survey on approaches to science dialogue.