Building trust with the public: Effective strategies for scientists

As discussed in the previous article, "Bridging the Gap: Understanding Public Trust in Scientists", and highlighted by Pew Research Center data (Pew Research Center, 2024), 76% of U.S. adults report having a great deal or fair amount of trust in scientists currently. This trust extends globally, as most countries (68 countries surveyed) also express confidence in scientists (Cologna et al., 2024; Soliman, 2024). Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, 86% of U.S. adults (January 2019) and 87% (April 2020) at the start of the pandemic reported similar levels of trust (Pew Research Center, 2024). However, as the pandemic progressed, public trust in scientists in the U.S. began to decline, eventually falling to 73% (October 2023). Although trust in scientists is slowly recovering, it is essential that scientists continue to work on rebuilding and strengthening public confidence, especially given the political dynamics that may undermine scientific progress. To effectively regain public trust, we must first understand the key issues within the scientific community that may be contributing to this erosion of trust.
 

Black Eye in Science: Publication Retractions, Integrity Issues, and Their Impact on Public Trust

Recently, there have been growing concerns about integrity issues within the scientific community. If scientists cannot trust each other's data or publications, how can we expect the public to place their trust in us? Addressing these issues is essential for restoring both internal confidence among researchers and external trust from the public.

Sharing knowledge is essential for advancing science and educating the public on how their tax dollars are being used, especially when research is funded by organizations like the National Science Foundation (NSF), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The dissemination of research, through publishing manuscripts and presenting findings at conferences, drives scientific progress and benefits public health. Published papers may be retracted if issues with data accuracy or integrity arise, which is why the peer-review system is so crucial. Peer review ensures that only high-quality research is disseminated, maintaining the integrity of the scientific process.

Over the past decade (2013–2023), data from Retraction Watch reveals a concerning increase in the number of retracted papers. In 2013, 1,510 papers were retracted, and by 2018, that number had nearly doubled to 2,811, up from 1,891 retractions in 2017 (Tran N, 2024). Another significant jump occurred in 2021, when 5,088 papers were retracted, compared to 3,625 in 2020 (Tran N, 2024). The trend continued in 2023, with a staggering 9,619 papers being retracted (Tran N, 2024). This sharp rise in retractions is a serious issue for the scientific community and could undermine public trust in the integrity of scientific research.

Figure 1: The number of retractions from 2013-2023 which is based on retractions logged in the retraction watch database (Tran N, 2024).

What are the main reasons for the high number of paper retractions? According to data from Retraction Watch, the leading cause, accounting for 47.7%, is issues related to data manipulation, papermills, or randomly generated content (Tran N, 2024). This is followed by 16.2% due to article duplication by authors, 16% due to plagiarism, 8.3% due to fake peer reviews, and 11.9% attributed to other factors, including 6.4% for various reasons and 5.5% for publication errors by journals or publishers (Tran N, 2024).

One can understand why trust in scientists has declined over the years. This decline may be linked to the increasing number of retractions, which raise concerns about taxpayers' money being wasted, as well as trust issues within the scientific community that undermine scientific integrity. One possible contributing factor is the intense competition for funding, which is influenced by university rankings and career advancement in academia. University administrators and department heads often pressure researchers to publish their findings, which can lead to the temptation to falsify data—a phenomenon known as "publish or perish."

Ultimately, the most important priority for scientists should be maintaining high integrity and advancing technology that benefits the public. Universities need to prioritize and promote research based on its quality and societal impact, rather than relying on journal-based metrics such as impact factors or citation counts (Tran N, 2024). Additionally, a fair system for allocating public research funds should be based on the quality and significance of the research proposal, with a focus on its potential impact on public interests, rather than seniority or the number of publications.

Other tools, such as the PubPeer platform and Problematic Paper Screener, can be used to prevent bad science from spreading through the literature by flagging suspicious or problematic papers (Cabanac G, 2024). However, these tools may be susceptible to biases, such as personal politics or competition between scientists. Additionally, investigating flagged papers can be time-consuming, often requiring lengthy reviews by journals (Cabanac G, 2024).

Scientists, universities, research institutions funded by public tax dollars, and journal editorial boards must all be held accountable for ensuring that the science they support, conduct, and publish is of high quality—accurate, reproducible, and beneficial to the public. As scientists, we must prioritize sharing knowledge and ensuring that all experimental data undergo peer review to uphold scientific integrity and, potentially, gain greater public trust. It is essential for researchers to share their methods and reagents so that others can replicate experiments, which in turn help build confidence in the reliability of the data.

Strategies for Strengthening Public Trust in Science

The public will often approach science with skepticism, influenced by factors such as politics, religion, and personal beliefs. As scientists, it is crucial to build trust with the public by demonstrating the benefits of science and how it can improve their lives or the lives of their loved ones. To bridge the gap between scientists and the public, effective communication, transparency, and a commitment to serving the public good are essential. Below, I outline strategies that can help scientists foster and maintain greater trust with the public.

Effective communication with the public

Pew Research Center’s most recent data from October 2024 shows that 45% of U.S. adults view scientists as “good communicators” (Pew Research Center, 2024). This suggests that the public perceives scientists as falling short in effective communication, even though scientists often believe they are doing a great job communicating with their peers. Globally, in 68 countries surveyed, 54% strongly agree that scientists should engage in science communication with the general public (Cologna et al., 2024). As scientists, we must improve our ability to communicate clearly and effectively with the public. Instead of relying on technical language and jargon to impress other scientists, we should focus on using accessible, simpler terms when engaging with the broader audience. Our communication should focus on larger, relatable stories that connect the importance of our research to the everyday lives of the public. It is also vital to be transparent and honest about the nature of science—acknowledging that it is not an absolute truth but emphasizing the significance and potential impact of the research.

Engaging with the public

As scientists, we need to engage with the public more regularly and approach them as equals, rather than as individuals who are somehow superior. We should collaborate with local schools, educational and outreach organizations, public libraries, museums, and offer public lectures that are accessible to both children and adults. These initiatives can spark interest in science among people of all ages. Additionally, we should make better use of social media platforms to reach broader audiences, share research in real-time, and directly answer questions from the public. Collaborating with journalists and media outlets is also crucial to promoting science and encouraging public engagement with scientific topics.

Why our research matters

As scientists, we excel at explaining the significance of our research when writing grants and publications. However, we need to bring that same level of engagement to the general public by clearly demonstrating the real-life applications of our work—how it impacts their lives or the lives of their loved ones. This includes advancements in medicine, environmental protection, and technology that make life better. Additionally, we must be open to the public's concerns, addressing ethical implications and being transparent about our responsibility in managing taxpayer funding.

Community collaboration

To build trust with the public, we need to actively collaborate and engage with communities through science and technology initiatives. This includes involving them in research projects and enhancing their opportunities to learn about science. Our research and projects should address the public’s most pressing concerns, while also listening to their needs and desires for improvements in their lives—not just pursuing our own goals and ambitions. By aligning our efforts with their priorities, we can foster a stronger connection and demonstrate the tangible value of science to society.

Long-term relationship

Trust is hard to earn and easy to lose; therefore, we must work to develop long-term relationships with the general public. These relationships should be consistent and mutually respectful, with open communication between scientists and the public. We need to demonstrate the long-term benefits of science by providing reliable, accurate, and evidence-based information, without imposing our own beliefs. Instead, we should allow the public to form their own understanding. Trust is a two-way street: we must also trust the public when they bring us concerns, questions, and doubts, and value their perspectives. This mutual respect and dialogue can lead to a deeper understanding and help build lasting trust between scientists and society.

Addressing misinformation and conspiracy theories

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation and conspiracy theories—often based on false or unfounded claims—have become more prevalent. This rise is partly due to political influences and the widespread reach of the internet, where anyone can easily spread misleading or fake information. While it is challenging to stop the flow of false content online, there are effective ways to address it. The most important approach is to confront misinformation directly by correcting false claims with facts and evidence. Equally important is educating the public on critical thinking skills, encouraging them to question the information they encounter. People should be equipped to verify facts independently by using reliable sources and tools to assess the accuracy of what they read and hear.

Scientists must build trust with the general public by maintaining high integrity, conducting quality research, and using public tax money responsibly, focusing on research that aligns with public interests. Effective communication, public engagement, and collaboration are key to this effort. Scientists should also explain the significance of their research in clear, accessible terms and actively address misinformation when it arises.

References:

Pew Research Center,  November 2024. “Public Trust in Scientists and Views on Their Role in Policymaking.”  https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2024/11/14/trust-in-science-2024-acknowledgments/

Cologna, V. et al. Preprint at OSF Preprints https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/6ay7s (2024).

Soliman A. (2024. November 14). US trusts in scientists plunged during the pandemic – but it’s starting to recover. Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-03723-5

Tran N (2024. September 23). The publish-or-perish mentality is fuelling research paper retractions and undermining science. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/the-publish-or-perish-mentality-is-fuelling-research-paper-retractions-and-undermining-science-238983

Cabanac G. (2024. August 28). Chain retraction: how to stop bad science propagating through the literature. Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-02747-1