Science Barometer 2021

With the Science Barometer, Wissenschaft im Dialog has been collecting population-representative data on the attitudes of citizens in Germany towards science and research every year since 2014. The aim is to contribute to a fact-based discourse on the relationship between science and the public and targeted science communication by collecting, processing and communicating the results. Accordingly, the questionnaire of the Science Barometer contains questions on cognitive attitudes such as interest and informedness and the information behaviour of the respondents on topics from science and research. A topic that has also been heavily discussed in the public debate over the past year and a half is the relationship between science and politics. The Science Barometer 2021 therefore also asks about people´s attitudes and opinions on issues and processes of scientific policy advice. Against the background of the Corona pandemic, the resulting changes in the perception of science and research were also addressed.

The results of the Science Barometer 2021 are based on 1,002 telephone interviews (landline/mobile, 80:20) conducted from 7 to 8 September 2021 as part of a multi-topic survey by Kantar - on behalf of Wissenschaft im Dialog. The German-speaking resident population in private households aged 14 and over served as the basic population. The Science Barometer 2021 is a project of Wissenschaft im Dialog. Sponsors and supporters are the Robert Bosch Stiftung and the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft.<br>1. Interest and information behaviour on topics from science and research: interest in the topics of politics, science and research, local affairs as well as economics and finance; information behaviour on topics from science and research: frequency of use of different sources of information (talking to friends or family, attending events, lectures or discussions, reading articles on scientific topics in printed newspapers or magazines, television programmes, radio programmes as well as frequency of information on the internet about science and research; frequency of use of different channels of information about science and research on the internet (Facebook, Twitter or other social networks, blog or online forums, Wikipedia, YouTube or similar video platforms, web presences of scientific institutions or organisations, websites or media libraries of news media such as newspapers, magazines or television channels, podcasts); trust in science and research; reasons for trust in scientists (are experts, work according to rules and standards, research in the interest of the public); reasons for distrust of scientists (often make mistakes, adjust results to their own expectations, are highly dependent on their funders).

2. Social role of research: agreement with statements about the relationship between science and society (scientists work for the good of society, scientists are aware of the social impact of their work, scientists make too little effort to inform the public about their work, science and research do more harm than good, I personally benefit from science and research, people trust science too much and not enough their feelings and faith, science and research have so little relevance to everyday life that they are not relevant to me, when scientists contradict each other it is difficult for me to judge which information is the right one, controversies between scientists are helpful because they help the right research results to prevail, even if there is no immediate benefit, research that provides new knowledge should be publicly funded); opinion on spending on research with reduced government spending (research should be one of the first areas for savings, spending on research should be cut in the same proportion as spending in other areas, should not be cut if possible); mutual influence of science, business and politics (of science on politics, of politics on science and of business on science); agreement with statements on the relationship between science and politics (political decisions should be based on scientific findings, it is not the task of scientists to interfere in politics, it is right for scientists to speak out publicly when political decisions do not take research findings into account).

3. Corona pandemic: Opinion on Corona: Current Corona measures are appropriate; great knowledge about the Corona virus; trust in statements of different actors in the context of the pandemic situation (scientists, doctors and medical staff, politicians, representatives of authorities and offices, journalists, relatives, acquaintances and friends); expectations towards the role of scientists in political decision-making processes on Corona (scientists should recommend certain decisions to politicians based on scientific findings, scientists should explain decision-making options and their consequences to politicians but not make recommendations, scientists should limit themselves to informing politicians about scientific findings); perception of the role of scientists in political decision-making processes on Corona (scientists recommend certain decisions to politicians based on scientific findings, scientists explain decision-making options and their consequences to politicians but do not make recommendations, scientists only inform politicians about scientific findings); perception about selection of scientists and advice by scientists (I have a perception of the influence of advice from scientists on political decisions, I have a perception of how scientists are selected to advise politicians); agreement with statements about science and research and general statements in the context of Corona (we should rely more on common sense when dealing with Corona and we don´t need scientific studies for that, scientists don´t tell us everything they know about the Corona virus, there is no clear evidence that the Corona virus really exists, the Corona pandemic is being made into a bigger deal than it actually is).

4. Personal relation to science and research: job in science and research; personal acquaintance with a scientist.

Demography: sex; age; education; occupation; occupation in detail; household size; children under 14 in household; net household income; party preference.

Additionally coded were: Interview no.; interview duration (in seconds); weight; city size (BIK); federal state; region.