Americans’ Complicated Relationship With Science

When you ask most Americans about science, the answer is usually enthusiastic – they’re curious, they think it matters, and they want it to improve society. Yet a fresh NC State study uncovers a twist: behind that enthusiasm lies a substantial lack of trust and a feeling of exclusion.

The researchers surveyed 1,854 adults across the country. Over 60 % said they were interested in science or believed it benefits society. But when the question shifted to credibility, only 43 % felt science was trustworthy. Even more striking, just 39 % said they felt they belonged to the scientific community.

These numbers aren’t evenly spread. Women, people without a college degree, and Black Americans reported weaker connections to science. The pattern echoes a long‑standing issue – science has historically been less welcoming to certain groups, and those old barriers still echo today.

Lead authors Brooklynn Joyner and Lincoln Larson, both from NC State’s Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, think the solution may lie in “citizen science.” In simple terms, citizen science invites everyday folks to join researchers in gathering data, analyzing results, and even co‑authoring studies. In the poll, about 14 % of respondents had taken part in multiple citizen‑science projects. Those participants reported higher interest, greater confidence in their ability to do science, a stronger sense of belonging, and a deeper belief in science’s value.

Why the credibility gap? Joyner says, “People want to believe in science, but we live in an increasingly skeptical world where data can be twisted to fit agendas. A bit of healthy doubt is fine; the danger is when it widens into outright mistrust.” Larson adds, “Many trust the idea of science but are wary of the scientists themselves – fearing hidden corporate or political motives, even if those fears are rarely justified.”

Is science inaccessible? Both authors agree it is. Joyner notes, “History excluded women and people of color from labs and classrooms. That legacy still shapes attitudes today. When science feels out of reach, it can dampen enthusiasm.” Larson emphasizes the need for outreach that speaks to diverse audiences, not just the traditional “white‑coat” image.

What about belonging? Joyner points out that interest doesn’t automatically translate to feeling welcome. “Someone might love astronomy but have no idea how to get involved beyond watching a night‑sky video. We need clear, positive pathways for deeper engagement.” Larson echoes, “Science has to become part of everyday life, not a distant, elite pursuit.”

Citizen science, they argue, can bridge the divide. By letting people roll up their sleeves – counting birds, tracking water quality, or cataloguing pollinators – the public gains hands‑on experience and a tangible stake in scientific outcomes. Those experiences, the study suggests, can reshape perceptions of credibility and foster a sense of community.

In short, Americans love science in theory but remain hesitant to fully trust the people behind it. Expanding participatory projects may be one of the most promising ways to turn curiosity into confidence and, ultimately, a more inclusive scientific enterprise.