Science is crucial for evidence-based decision-making. Public trust in scientists can help decision-makers act based on the best available evidence, especially during crises. However, in recent years the epistemic authority of science has been challenged, causing concerns about low public trust in scientists. We interrogated these concerns with a pre-registered 68-country survey of 71,922 respondents and find that in most countries, most people trust scientists and agree that scientists should engage more in society and policymaking. We find variations between and within countries, which we explain with individual- and country-level variables, including political orientation. While there is no widespread lack of trust in scientists, we cannot discount the concern that lack of trust in scientists by even a small minority may affect considerations of scientific evidence in policymaking. These findings have implications for scientists and policymakers seeking to maintain and increase trust in scientists.

Science is integral to society because it can inform individual, government, corporate, and civil society decision-making on issues such as climate change. Yet, public distrust and populist sentiment may challenge the relationship between science and society. To help researchers analyse the science-society nexus across different cultural contexts, we undertook a cross-sectional survey resulting in a dataset of 71,922 participants in 68 countries. The data were collected between November 2022 and August 2023 as part of the global Many Labs study “Trust in Science and Science-Related Populism” (TISP). The questionnaire contained comprehensive measures for individuals’ trust in scientists, science-related populist attitudes, perceptions of the role of science in society, science media use and communication behaviour, attitudes to climate change and support for environmental policies, personality traits, political and religious views and demographic characteristics. Here, we describe the dataset, survey materials and psychometric properties of key variables. We encourage researchers to use this unique dataset for global comparative analyses on public perceptions of science and its role in society and policy-making.

Extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and intense due to climate change. This might affect support for climate policies, especially if more people attribute these events to climate change. Yet little is known about whether actual impacts of extreme events and subjective attribution of these events to climate change influence climate policy support, especially in the Global South. Combining large-scale natural and social science data, we develop a measure of actual impacts of extreme weather events on population and investigate whether actual impacts and subjective attribution of these events to climate change relate to climate policy support in 68 countries (N = 71,922). Globally, most people support climate policies and link extreme weather events to climate change. We find that subjective attribution is associated with policy support, whereas actual impacts are mostly not. Our results suggest that demonstrating the link between extreme weather events and climate change likely increases policy support.

Science communicators, educators, and policy-makers around the world need robust evidence on how people inform themselves about science-related issues and communicate about them with others. We provide such evidence, drawing on a global population survey (n = 71,922 in 68 countries) that gives nationally representative insights into people’s science information diets and communication behavior and elucidates cross-country patterns. The analyses show that social media are the most important source of science-related information in most countries—except in those with pluralistic, professionalized, state-subsidized, and public service-oriented media, where people report using news media more frequently. The results also suggest that citizens in collectivist societies are less outspoken about science in daily life. Participation in public protests on science-related issues, such as climate change and COVID-19, seems to depend on local legislative conditions and the importance of civic engagement in political culture. Further analyses test whether country differences are contingent upon national levels of educational attainment, freedom of academic exchange and dissemination, access to digital media, GDP per capita, press freedom, freedom of speech, and the degree of democratic deliberation. Overall, we provide unique comparative evidence on public communication about science across the world, which can help to inform science communication scholarship and practice globally.