Americans’ Love‑Hate Relationship with Science: New NC State Study Says It’s Complicated

When you ask people across the country what they think about science, the answers are rarely black‑and‑white. A recent NC State study uncovered a nuanced picture: curiosity and appreciation are high, yet confidence in scientists and a sense of belonging are surprisingly low.

The researchers, Brooklynn Joyner and Lincoln Larson from the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, surveyed 1,854 Americans last summer. Over 60 % of respondents said they were interested in science and believed it benefits society. But only 43 % thought science was credible, and a mere 39 % felt they fit in with the scientific community.

“People want to believe in science, sure,” Joyner explains, “but we live in a world where scientific findings can be twisted to serve all kinds of agendas. That breeds a healthy dose of skepticism, but it can also create a larger gap than we’re comfortable with.”

Larson adds a different angle: “Many folks trust the idea of science, but they don’t necessarily trust the people doing the research. They suspect hidden motives, whether corporate or political. Even if those suspicions are misplaced, they erode credibility.”

Digging deeper, the data showed that the gap isn’t evenly spread. Women were less likely to say they were interested in science, and Black respondents were less likely to say they believed science adds value to society. Those without a college degree also reported weaker connections across the board.

These disparities echo long‑standing concerns about accessibility and inclusivity in the scientific arena. “Historically, women and people of color were shut out of labs and fieldwork,” Joylet notes. “Those old barriers still echo today, shaping how groups perceive and engage with science.”

So, what can be done? Joyner and Larson point to citizen science – also called participatory or community science – as a promising avenue. By inviting everyday people to collect data, analyze results, and co‑author findings, citizen‑science projects turn the abstract idea of “science” into something tangible and personal.

In the same survey, about 14 % of participants said they had taken part in multiple citizen‑science projects. Those volunteers reported higher interest in science, greater confidence in their own scientific abilities, a stronger sense of belonging, and a heightened belief in science’s societal value.

“I see citizen science as a bridge,” Joyner says. “When you let someone hold a thermometer, a camera, or a spreadsheet, you give them a stake in the process. That stake can turn curiosity into confidence.”

Still, obstacles remain. Joyner points out that interest alone doesn’t guarantee ongoing involvement: “Someone might love watching documentaries, but they don’t know where to start if they want to roll up their sleeves. We need clear pathways and welcoming spaces, not just occasional calls for volunteers.”

Larson emphasizes relevance: “Science isn’t just for people in white coats. It’s in the air we breathe, the food we eat, the storms we weather. If we can show that connection, people will feel it’s theirs too.”

Both researchers agree that building trust will require more than just projects; it calls for transparent communication, diversity among scientists, and genuine partnership with communities that have historically been left out.

In short, the study paints a mixed portrait: Americans are broadly fascinated by science, yet many remain wary of the people who practice it and feel excluded from the conversation. Citizen‑science initiatives could be one of the most effective ways to turn that fascination into participation, and eventually, into a deeper, more inclusive trust.

As Joyner puts it, “We have a chance now to rewrite the story of who gets to do science. Let’s make sure the next chapter includes everyone.”