Public Understanding of Science

(The TQCC of Public Understanding of Science is 6. The table below lists those papers that are above that threshold based on CrossRef citation counts [max. 250 papers]. The publications cover those that have been published in the past four years, i.e., from 2020-02-01 to 2024-02-01.)
Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science149
A review of the effects of uncertainty in public science communication96
The nature and origins of political polarization over science56
The dangers of blind trust: Examining the interplay among social media news use, misinformation identification, and news trust on conspiracy beliefs56
Knowledge, (mis-)conceptions, risk perception, and behavior change during pandemics: A scoping review of 149 studies51
Between security and convenience: Facial recognition technology in the eyes of citizens in China, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States44
Spiritual skepticism? Heterogeneous science skepticism in the Netherlands38
A systematic review of narrative interventions: Lessons for countering anti-vaccination conspiracy theories and misinformation36
What do we believe in? Rumors and processing strategies during the COVID-19 outbreak in China34
Replication crisis = trust crisis? The effect of successful vs failed replications on laypeople’s trust in researchers and research30
Knowledge about the nature of science increases public acceptance of science regardless of identity factors30
A desire for authoritative science? How citizens’ informational needs and epistemic beliefs shaped their views of science, news, and policymaking in the COVID-19 pandemic27
Deference and decision-making in science and society: How deference to scientific authority goes beyond confidence in science and scientists to become authoritarianism26
Immunized against science: Narrative community building among vaccine refusing/hesitant parents25
A deliberative study of public attitudes towards sharing genomic data within NHS genomic medicine services in England24
The ideological divide in public perceptions of self-driving cars24
Interactions between emotional and cognitive engagement with science on YouTube20
Exploring scholars’ public engagement goals in Canada and the United States20
Transformation of the media landscape: Infotainment versus expository narrations for communicating science in online videos20
Let’s (not) talk about synthetic biology: Framing an emerging technology in public and stakeholder dialogues18
Following science on social media: The effects of humor and source likability18
Reconfiguring health knowledges? Contemporary modes of self-care as ‘everyday fringe medicine’17
The spread of fake science: Lexical concreteness, proximity, misinformation sharing, and the moderating role of subjective knowledge17
Expert communication on Twitter: Comparing economists’ and scientists’ social networks, topics and communicative styles15
The effect of misinformation and inoculation: Replication of an experiment on the effect of false experts in the context of climate change communication15
Ignorance or culture war? Christian nationalism and scientific illiteracy15
Psychological underpinnings of pandemic denial - patterns of disagreement with scientific experts in the German public during the COVID-19 pandemic15
Can hype be a force for good?: Inviting unexpected engagement with science and technology futures14
Open science and public trust in science: Results from two studies14
Public acceptance of evolution in the United States, 1985–202014
The role of motivated science reception and numeracy in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic14
#JunkScience: Investigating pseudoscience disinformation in the Russian Internet Research Agency tweets14
Science-related populism declining during the COVID-19 pandemic: A panel survey of the Swiss population before and after the Coronavirus outbreak14
Before and after the Chinese gene-edited human babies: Multiple discourses of gene editing on social media14
Brahmins as scientists and science as Brahmins’ calling: Caste in an Indian scientific research institute14
Scientists as comedians: The effects of humor on perceptions of scientists and scientific messages13
The “replication crisis” in the public eye: Germans’ awareness and perceptions of the (ir)reproducibility of scientific research13
How psychedelic researchers’ self-admitted substance use and their association with psychedelic culture affect people’s perceptions of their scientific integrity and the quality of their research13
Science rejection in Greece: Spirituality predicts vaccine scepticism and low faith in science in a Greek sample13
Fostering climate change consensus: The role of intimacy in group discussions12
Call them COVIDiots: Exploring the effects of aggressive communication style and psychological distance in the communication of COVID-1912
What drives science media use? Predictors of media use for information about science and research in digital information environments12
Influence of intrinsic motivations on the continuity of scientific knowledge contribution to online knowledge-sharing platforms11
Deconstruction of the discourse authority of scientists in Chinese online science communication: Investigation of citizen science communicators on Chinese knowledge sharing networks11
Public perception of geothermal power plants in Korea following the Pohang earthquake: A social representation theory study11
Knowing when to talk? Plant genome editing as a site for pre-engagement institutional reflexivity11
Talk like an expert: The construction of expertise in news comments concerning climate change11
Assessing YouTube science news’ credibility: The impact of web-search on the role of video, source, and user attributes11
Emotion and judgments of scientific research11
Associations between conspiracism and the rejection of scientific innovations11
Stop avoiding the inevitable: The effects of anthropomorphism in science writing for non-experts11
Reporting preprints in the media during the COVID-19 pandemic11
Selected by expertise? Scientific experts in German news coverage of COVID-19 compared to other pandemics10
Jargon use in Public Understanding of Science papers over three decades10
Do as the Romans do: On the authoritarian roots of pseudoscience10
‘We will multiply the fires of resistance’: The catalysts of dissent against institutional science and their interplay with refused knowledge communities10
Universities claim to value community-engaged scholarship: So why do they discourage it?9
Experience, experts, statistics, or just science? Predictors and consequences of reliance on different evidence types during the COVID-19 infodemic9
Reframing sociotechnical imaginaries: The case of the Fourth Industrial Revolution9
Population health AI researchers’ perceptions of the public portrayal of AI: A pilot study9
Between concepts and experiences: understandings of climate change in southern Ecuador9
The Dawkins effect? Celebrity scientists, (non)religious publics and changed attitudes to evolution8
Synthetic livestock vaccines as risky interference with nature? Lay and expert arguments and understandings of “naturalness”8
No harm in being self-corrective: Self-criticism and reform intentions increase researchers’ epistemic trustworthiness and credibility in the eyes of the public8
Mapping mental models of science communication: How academics in Germany, Austria and Switzerland understand and practice science communication8
The effects of media narratives about failures and discoveries in science on beliefs about and support for science8
Data authority: Public debate about personalized medicine in Denmark8
The press club as indicator of science medialization: How Japanese research organizations adapt to domestic media conventions8
Children’s conceptions of coronavirus8
Trust or attention? Medialization of science revisited8
Thirty years of science–society interfaces: What’s next?8
Re-visioning public engagement with emerging technology: A digital methods experiment on ‘vertical farming’8
Visualizing science: The impact of infographics on free recall, elaboration, and attitude change for genetically modified foods news8
Lithuanian scientists’ behavior and views on science communication8
Art for public engagement on emerging and controversial technologies: A literature review8
‘It’s all the other stuff!’ How smokers understand (and misunderstand) chemicals in cigarettes and cigarette smoke7
Poly-truth, or the limits of pluralism: Popular debates on conspiracy theories in a post-truth era7
How journalists and experts metaphorically frame emerging information technologies: The case of cyberinfrastructure for big data7
Making sense of “superbugs” on YouTube: A storytelling approach7
Science communication and mediatised environmental conflict: A cautionary tale7
How deliberative designs empower citizens’ voices: A case study on Ghana’s deliberative poll on agriculture and the environment7
Imagined futures for livestock gene editing: Public engagement in the Netherlands6
Are you passing along something true or false? Dissemination of social media messages about genetically modified organisms6
Public understanding of science and technology in the Internet era6
Do scientists have a responsibility to provide climate change expertise to mitigation and adaptation strategies? Perspectives from climate professionals6
What science means to me: Understanding personal identification with (evolutionary) science using the sociology of (non)religion6
Lay and scientific categorizations of new breeding techniques: Implications for food policy and genetically modified organism legislation6
Public trust and mistrust of climate science: A meta-narrative review6
Political beliefs, views about technocracy, and energy and climate policy preferences6
Can scientists use simple infographics to convince? Effects of the “flatten the curve” charts on perceptions of and behavioral intentions toward social distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic6
Quantifying scientific jargon6
Effects of gender harassment on science popularization behaviors6
Examining science communication on Reddit: From an “Assembled” to a “Disassembling” approach6
Public communication at research universities: Moving towards (de)centralised communication of science?6