Confianza en la ciencia: temas y tendencias de investigación de un paradigma emergente

Francisco Javier  Jiménez-Loaisa; Diana Jareño-Ruiz; Pablo de-Gracia-Soriano

doi:10.3989/redc.2025.3.1676

Authors

Francisco Javier Jiménez-Loaisa Universidad de Alicante, Departamento de Sociología I, Grupo de Investigaciones Sociológicas (GIS-UA) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6802-7830
Diana Jareño-Ruiz Universidad de Alicante, Departamento de Sociología I, Grupo de Investigaciones Sociológicas (GIS-UA) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9482-8017
Pablo de-Gracia-Soriano Universidad de Alicante, Departamento de Sociología I, Grupo de Investigaciones Sociológicas (GIS-UA) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4809-4742

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2025.3.1676

Keywords:

trust in science, science communication, bibliometrics, social perception of science, covid-19

Abstract

This study focuses on the proliferation of the term “trust in science” across various bibliographic databases. The main objective is to outline the research surrounding this concept, aiming to bring its scope of problems and theoretical and methodological proposals closer to the Spanish-speaking research community. To achieve this, 623 documents extracted from the Scopus platform, published between 2014 and 2023, are analyzed. A co-ocurrence analysis of keywords is conducted to identify the main topics and trends. The results explicitly show how the recent Covid-19 pandemic has accelerated research on trust in science, at the expense of topics such as climate change or the integrity of scientific research. Finally, a reflection on the present and future of this emerging research paradigm is presented.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Allum, N., Sturgis, P., Tabourazi, D., y Brunton-Smith, I. (2008). Science knowledge and attitudes across cultures: a meta-analysis. Public Understanding of Science, 17(1), 35-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506070159

Baratucci, M., Pagliaro, S., Ballone, C., Teresi, M., Consoli, C., Garofalo, A., de Giorgio, A., y Ramaci, T. (2022). Trust in science as a possible mediator between different antecedents and COVID-19 booster vaccination intention: an integration of Health Belief Model (HBM) and Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). Vaccines, 7(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10071099 PMid:35891265 PMCid:PMC9320855

Barber, B. (1987). Trust in science. Minerva, 25(1-2), 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01096860

Bates, S. R., Faulkner, W., Parry, S., y Cunningham-Burley, S. (2010). 'How do we know it's not been done yet?!' Trust, trust building and regulation in stem cell research. Science and Public Policy, 37(9), 703-718. https://doi.org/10.1093/spp/37.9.703

Bauer, M. W. (2009). The evolution of public understanding of science-discourse and comparative evidence. Science, Technology and Society, 14(2), 221-240. https://doi.org/10.1177/097172180901400202

Beck, U. (1986). La sociedad del riesgo: hacia una nueva modernidad. Paidós.

Besley, J. C., Lee, N. M., y Pressgrove, G. (2021). Reassessing the variables used to measure public perceptions of scientists. Science Communication, 43, 3-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547020949547

Besley, J. C., y Tiffany, L. A. (2023). What are you assessing when you measure "trust" in scientists with a direct measure? Public Understanding of Science, 32(6), 709-726. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625231161302 PMid:37013258

Blöbaum, B. (2021). Some thoughts on the nature of trust: concept, models and theory. En Blöbaum (2021). Trust and Communication. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72945-5

Boudet, H., Lobera, J., y Torres-Albero, C. (2018). La percepción social del 'fracking' en España. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2018. FECYT.

Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., Turner, W. A., y Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: an introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22, 191-235. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901883022002003

Dohle, S., Wingen, T., y Schreiber, M. (2020). Acceptance and adoption of protective measures during the COVID-19 pandemic: the role of trust in politics and trust in science. Social Psychological Bulletin, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.32872/spb.4315

Drummond, C., y Fischhoff, B. (2017). Individuals with greater science literacy and education have more polarized beliefs on controversial science topics. PNAS, 114(36), 9587-9592. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704882114 PMid:28827344 PMCid:PMC5594657

Espluga, J. (2016). Percepciones de riesgo en aplicaciones biotecnológicas. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2016. FECYT.

Fernández Prados, J. S. (2003). El valor de la ciencia y de la tecnología en la cultura española contemporánea. En Bericat, E. El conflicto cultural en España: acuerdos y desacuerdos entre los españoles. CIS.

Fernández, M., Cárdenas, J., y Sánchez, M. I. (2018). El estatus científico de profesiones y prácticas: una comparación entre ciencias experimentales, ciencias sociales y pseudociencias. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2018. FECYT.

Fiske, S. T., y Dupree, C. (2014). Gaining trust as well as respect in communicating to motivated audiences about science topics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(Sup. 4), 13593-13597. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317505111 PMid:25225372 PMCid:PMC4183178

Funtowicz, S., y Ravetz, J. (2000). Ciencia posnormal: ciencia con la gente. Icaria.

Gauchat, G. (2011). The cultural authority of science: public trust and acceptance of organized science. Public Understanding of Science, 20(6), 751-770. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510365246 PMid:22397083

Gauchat, G. (2012). Politicization of science in the public sphere: a study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. American Sociological Review, 77(2), 167-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412438225

Giachi, S., Iturrarte, D., y Fernández, M. (2016). Ciencia, tecnología y "clases creativas". La influencia de la creatividad ocupacional en la percepción de la ciencia y la tecnología. En Percepción social de la ciencia y la tecnología 2016. FECYT.

Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford University Press.

Gillespie, N. (2015). Survey measures of trust in organizational contexts: an overview. En Lyon, F., Möllering, G., y Saunders, M. (eds.). Handbook of research methods on trust. Edward Elgar Publishing, 225-239. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781782547419.00031

González Alcaide, G., y Gómez Ferri, J. (2014). La colaboración científica: principales líneas de investigación y retos de futuro. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 37(4), e062. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2014.4.1186

Grosser, K. M., Hase, V., y Blöbaum, B. (2016). Trust in online journalism. En Blöbaum, B. (ed.). Trust and communication in a digitized world. Springer, 53-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28059-2_3

Hendriks, F., Distel, B., Engelke, K. M., Westmattelmann, D., y Wintterlin, F. (2021). Methodological and practical challenges of interdisciplinary trust research. En Blöbaum, B. (ed.). Trust and Communication. Springer International Publishing/Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72945-5_2

Hendriks, F., Kienhues, D., y Bromme, R. (2015). Measuring laypeople's trust in experts in a digital age: the Muenster Epistemic Trustworthiness Inventory (METI). PLoS One, 10(10), e013909. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139309 PMid:26474078 PMCid:PMC4608577

Hendriks, F., Kienhues, D., y Bromme, R. (2016). Trust in science and the science of trust. En Blöbaum, B. (ed.). Trust and communication in a digitized world: models and concepts of trust research, 143-159. Springer International Publishing/Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28059-2_8 PMCid:PMC4751275

Holton, G. (1993). Science and anti-science. Harvard University Press.

Hromatko, I., Tonkovic, M., y Vranic, A. (2021). Trust in science, perceived vulnerability to disease, and adherence to pharmacological and non-pharmacological COVID-19 recommendations. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.664554 PMid:33995222 PMCid:PMC8119629

Intemann, K. (2023). Science communication and public trust in science. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 48(2), 350-365. https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2152244

Irwin, A. (2001). Sociology and the environment: a critical introduction to society, nature and knowledge. Cambridge Polity Press.

Jiménez-Loaisa, F. J., y Jareño-Ruiz, D. (2024). Confianza en la ciencia: características bibliométricas de una línea de investigación emergente e implicaciones para los estudios de percepción social de la ciencia. En Crescenza, G., y Fiorucci, M. (eds.). Educación e innovación al servicio de la mejora del conocimiento. Aula Magna/McGrawHill, pp. 325-342.

Jiménez-Loaisa, F. J., Jareño-Ruiz, D., y de-Gracia-Soriano, P. (2024). The science of trust in science: COVID-19 and its implications for "trust". En Visvizi, A., Troisi, O., y Corvello, V. (eds.). Research and Innovation Forum 2023. Springer Proceedings in Complexity, 673-683. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-44721-1_51

Kahan, D. M., Peters, E., Wittlin, M., Slovic, P., Ouellette, L. L., Braman, D., et al. (2012). The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Climate Change, 2, 732-735. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1547 PMCid:PMC9517281

Kuhn, T. (1962). La estructura de las revoluciones científicas. Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Lobera, J., y Torres-Albero, C. (2016). Factores sociales de la oposición a aplicaciones tecnocientíficas controvertidas. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2016. FECYT.

Lobera, J., Hornsey, M., y Díaz-Catalán, C. (2018). Los factores que influyen en la reticencia a la vacunación en España. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2018. FECYT.

Lobera, J., y Torres-Albero, C. (2018). La tecnociencia como campo de controversia. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2018. FECYT.

Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. Wiley.

Matta, S., Rogova, N., y Luna-Cortés, G. (2022). Investigating tolerance of uncertainty, COVID-19 concern, and compliance with recommended behavior in four countries: the moderating role of mindfulness, trust in scientists, and power distance. Personality and Individual Differences, 186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111352 PMid:34690395 PMCid:PMC8523491

Mayer, R. C., David, J. H., y Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709. https://doi.org/10.2307/258792

Nadelson, L., Jorcyk, C., Yang, D., Jarratt Smith, M., Matson, S., Cornell, K., y Husting, V. (2014). I just don't trust them: the development and validation of an assessment instrument to measure trust in science and scientists. School Science and Mathematics, 114(2), 76-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12051 PMCid:PMC8270185

O'Doherty, K. C. (2022). Trust, trustworthiness, and relationships: ontological reflections on public trust in science. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2022.2091311

Oreskes, N. (2021). Why trust in science?. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691222370 PMCid:PMC8054254

Ortega, E. (2018). De la brecha de género al análisis interseccional de disciplinas STEM. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2018. FECYT.

Pardo, R., y Calvo, F. (2002). Attitudes toward science among the European public: a methodological analysis. Public Understanding of Science, 11(2), 155-195. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/11/2/305

Parejo-Cuellar, M., Flores-Jaramillo, S., y Carcaboso-García, E. (2023). Tendencias en producción científica sobre comunicación de la ciencia durante el período 2017-2021. Revista Española De Documentación Científica, 46(4), e368. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2023.4.2003

Parikh, S. (2021). Why we must rebuild trust in science: Pew Trust. Disponible en: https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/trend/archive/winter-2021/why-we-must-rebuild-trust-in-science.

Quintanilla, M. A., Escobar, M., y Santos-Requejo, L. (2018). Perfiles de cultura científica ciudadana. Sus características y su relación con prácticas no científicas. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2018. FECYT.

Radrizzani, S., Fonseca, C., Woollard, A., Pettit, J., y Hurst, L. (2023). Both trust in, and polarization of trust in, relevant sciences have increased through the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE, 18(3), e0278169. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278169 PMid:36952552 PMCid:PMC10035814

Reif, A., y Guenther, L. (2021). How representative surveys measure public (dis)trust in science: A systematization and analysis of survey items and open-ended questions. Journal of Trust Research, 11(2), 94-118. https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2022.2075373

Reif, A., Taddicken, M., Guenther, L., Schröder, J. T., y Weingart, P. (2024). The Public Trust in Science Scale (PuTS): A Multilevel and Multidimensional approach. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/bp8s6

Robles, J. M., y De Marco, S. (2018). Postmaterialismo y comunitarismo como predictores de la percepción de la ciencia y la tecnología. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2018. FECYT.

Sáinz, M., y Martínez-Cantos, J. L. (2016). Desigualdades de género en la percepción social de la ciencia y la tecnología en función de la edad y el nivel educativo. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2016. FECYT.

Santos-Requejo, L., Escobar, M., y Quintanilla, M. A. (2016). Dimensiones y modelos de cultura científica: implicaciones prácticas para la financiación y la demarcación de la ciencia. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2016. FECYT.

Tehrani, S. O., y Perkins, D. (2022). Community health resources, globalization, trust in science, and voting as predictors of COVID-19 vaccination rates: a global study with implications for vaccine adherence. Vaccines, 10(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10081343 PMid:36016231 PMCid:PMC9416245

Van Eck, N. J., y Waltman, L. (2016). VOSviewer manual: version 1.6.6. Disponible en: https://www.vosviewer.com/download/f-33r2.pdf.

Van den Eynde, A. M. (2016). La imagen de la ciencia en España a través de la lente del modelo PICA. En Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2016. FECYT.

Weingart, P., y Guenther, L. (2016). Science communication and the issue of trust. Journal of Science Communication, 15(5), C01. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.15050301

Wintterlin, F., y Blöbaum, B. (2016). Examining journalist's trust in sources: an analytical model capturing a key problem in journalism. En Blöbaum, B. (Ed.). Trust and communication in a digitized world. Springer, 75-90. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28059-2_4

Wynen, J., Op de Beeck, S., Verhoest, K., Glavina, M., Six, F., Van Damme, P., Beutels, P., Hendrickx, G., y Pepermans, K. (2022). Taking a COVID-19 vaccine or not? Do trust in government and trust in experts help us to understand vaccination intention? Administration & Society, 10(54), 1875-1901. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997211073459

Wynne, B. (1996). May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide. En Lash, S., Szerszynski, B., y Wynne, B. (eds.). Risk, environment and modernity: toward a new ecology, 44-83. Sage, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446221983.n3

Yearley, S. (2000). Making systematic sense of public discontents with expert knowledge: two analytical approaches and a case study. Public Understanding of Science, 9, 105-122. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/9/2/302