Nature Human Behaviour (2025)

Viktoria Cologna, Niels G. Mede, Sebastian Berger, John Besley, Cameron Brick, Marina Joubert, Edward W. Maibach, Sabina Mihelj, Naomi Oreskes, Mike S. Schäfer, Sander van der Linden & TISP Consortium

Science is crucial for evidence-based decision-making. Public trust in scientists can help decision makers act on the basis of 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 preregistered 68-country survey of 71,922 respondents and found that in most countries, most people trust scientists and agree that scientists should engage more in society and policymaking. We found 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.

Scientific Data (2025)

Niels G. Mede*, Viktoria Cologna*, Sebastian Berger, John Besley, Cameron Brick, Marina Joubert, Edward W. Maibach, Sabina Mihelj, Naomi Oreskes, Mike S. Schäfer, Sander van der Linden & TISP Consortium

*Authors contributed equally 

Science is integral to society because it can inform individual, government, corporate, and civil society decision-making on issues such as public health, new technologies or climate change. Yet, public distrust and populist sentiment challenge the relationship between science and society. To help researchers analyse the science-society nexus across different geographical and cultural contexts, we undertook a cross-sectional population 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. 

Nature Climate Change (2025)

Viktoria Cologna, Simona Meiler, Chahan M. Kropf, Samuel Lüthi, Niels G. Mede, David N. Bresch, Oscar Lecuona, Sebastian Berger, John Besley, Cameron Brick, Marina Joubert, Edward W. Maibach, Naomi Oreskes, Mike S. Schäfer, Sander van der Linden & TISP Consortium

Extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and intense due to climate change. Yet, little is known about the relationship between exposure to extreme events, subjective attribution of these events to climate change, and climate policy support, especially in the Global South. Combining large-scale natural and social science data from 68 countries (N = 71,922), we develop a measure of exposed population to extreme weather events and investigate whether exposure to extreme weather and subjective attribution of extreme weather to climate change predict climate policy support. We find that most people support climate policies and link extreme weather events to climate change. Subjective attribution of extreme weather was positively associated with policy support for five widely discussed climate policies. However, exposure to most types of extreme weather event did not predict policy support. Overall, these results suggest that subjective attribution could facilitate climate policy support. 

Science Communication (2025)

Niels G. Mede, Viktoria Cologna, Sebastian Berger, John Besley, Cameron Brick, Marina Joubert, Edward W. Maibach, Sabina Mihelj, Naomi Oreskes, Mike S. Schäfer, Sander van der Linden, & TISP Consortium

This 68-country survey (n = 71,922) examines science information diets and communication behavior, identifies cross-country differences, and tests how such differences are associated with sociopolitical and economic conditions. We find that social media are the most used sources of science information in most countries, except those with democratic-corporatist media systems where news media tend to be used more widely. People in collectivist societies are less outspoken about science in daily life, whereas lower education is associated with higher outspokenness. Limited access to digital media is correlated with participation in public protests on science matters. We discuss implications for future research, policy, and practice. 

Environmental Research Letters (2025)

Omid Ghasemi, Viktoria Cologna, Niels G. Mede, Samantha Stanley, Noel Strahm, Robert Ross, Mark Alfano, John R. Kerr, Mathew D. Marques, Sebastian Berger, John Besley, Cameron Brick, Marina Joubert, Edward Maibach, Sabina Mihelj, Ben R. Newell, Naomi Oreskes, & Mike S. Schäfer

This study compares public trust in climate scientists and scientists in general across 68 countries (N = 69,534). On average, participants reported moderately high levels of trust in climate scientists, with trust levels being slightly lower than trust in scientists in general. Overall, this trust gap was larger among participants who identified as politically conservative or right-leaning, but there was considerable variation across countries.

Irish Educational Studies (2025)

Joseph Roche, Mairéad Hurley, Karen Fowler, Amelia McConville, Aoife Taylor, Niels G. Mede, & Viktoria Cologna

Public trust in scientists is vital for navigating complex global challenges, influencing evidence-informed policy, and promoting societal well-being. However, concerns exist about a potential crisis of trust in science, fuelled by misinformation, conspiracy theories, and science-related populism. The Trust in Science and Science-Related Populism (TISP) study investigated public perceptions of scientists across 68 countries. This paper examines the TISP findings for Ireland, focusing on public trust in scientists and the implications for the Irish educational landscape. The study reveals that trust in scientists in Ireland is generally moderate to high, exceeding global averages, but notably lower among younger respondents. Regression analyses show a strong association between trust in scientific methods and overall trust in scientists, highlighting the importance of robust science education with a strong emphasis on science communication. Qualitative analysis of open-ended responses reveals a strong expectation that scientists should embody professionalism, integrity, and continuous self-improvement. These findings suggest a need for targeted science education and communication efforts in Ireland, emphasising critical thinking skills, understanding of the scientific process, and the ethical responsibilities of scientists. Promoting transparency, dialogue, and public participation in scientific endeavours will help foster a more robust and trusting relationship between science and society in Ireland.

European Journal of Social Psychology (2025)

Daniel Toribio-Flórez, Marlene S. Altenmüller, Karen M. Douglas, Mario Gollwitzer, Indro Adinugroho, Mark Alfano, Denisa Apriliawati, Flavio Azevedo, Cornelia Betsch, Olga Białobrzeska, Amélie Bret, André Calero Valdez, Viktoria Cologna, Gabriela Czarnek, Sylvain Delouvée, Kimberly C. Doell, Simone Dohle, ..., Adrian Dominik Wojcik

Conspiracy beliefs have been linked to perceptions of collective victimhood. We adopt an individual perspective on victimhood by investigating the relationship between conspiracy beliefs and the individual disposition to perceive and react to injustice as a victim, i.e., victim justice sensitivity (VJS). Data from two German samples (Ns = 370, 373) indicated a positive association between VJS and conspiracy mentality beyond conceptually related covariates (e.g., mistrust). In a multinational sample from 15 countries (N = 14,978), VJS was positively associated with both general and specific conspiracy beliefs (about vaccines and climate change) within countries, though these associations varied across countries. However, economic, sociopolitical and cultural country-level factors that might explain the cross-country variability (e.g., GDP, Human Freedom Index, individualism–collectivism), including indices of collective exposure to direct violence, did not moderate the studied associations. Future research should investigate the relationship between victimhood and conspiracy beliefs, considering both intraindividual and intergroup perspectives.

Journal of Environmental Psychology (2025)

Kyle Fiore Law, Zhaoquan Wang, Christian T. Elbaek, Antoinette Fage-Butler, Panagiotis Mitkidis, Theofilos Gkinopoulos, Ewa Szumowska, Gabriela Czarnek, Adrian Dominik Wojcik, Simon Fulgsang, Dominika Jurgiel, Małgorzata Dzimińska, Izabela Warwas, Michal Parzuchowski, Olga Bialobrzeska, … Stylianos Syropoulos

Feeling personally responsible for climate change is a key predictor of pro-environmental action. Recent U.S.-based research finds that people more strongly endorse responsibility to protect future generations (RFG) than responsibility to reduce climate change (RCC). Here, we conceptually replicated this finding across six European countries and tested whether RFG and RCC predicted climate-relevant attitudes beyond the U.S. context. Consistent with prior work, RFG was endorsed slightly more than RCC, and both types of responsibility significantly predicted support for climate policy. Additionally, RFG and RCC were positively associated with negative emotional responses to climate change and with attributions of increasing severe weather events, both past and anticipated, to climate change. These results suggest that even in less polarized political environments, responsibility to future generations is more widely endorsed than responsibility to mitigate climate change. Still, both constructs appear psychologically meaningful and help explain variation in climate concern and policy support.

Journal of Environmental Psychology (2025)

Samantha K. Stanley, Omid Ghasemi, John R. Kerr, Robert M. Ross, Mathew D. Marques, Niels G. Mede, Sebastian Berger, Mark Alfano, Neil Levy, Marinus Ferreira, Viktoria Cologna

Research on support for climate policies has predominantly focused on support for mitigation policies. Research remains scarce on public support for climate aid policy (i.e., adaptation policies that direct support to those most affected by climate change). The justice implications of unmitigated climate change loom large, yet it is currently unclear to what extent people view climate change as an inequality issue. To investigate this, we surveyed participants from the United Kingdom (n = 531), United States (n = 528), Australia (n = 1450), and New Zealand (n = 1022) on attitudes about climate change inequality, experiences of climate emotions, support for climate aid policy, and political orientation. Those who reported greater agreement that climate change is an inequality issue also reported experiencing more intense negative emotions about climate change and greater support for climate aid policy. We propose a theoretical model whereby political conservatives are less likely to see climate change as an inequality issue, which could account for their lower support for climate aid policy and their more muted emotional response to climate change. We find preliminary support for this model using mediation analyses. Our findings suggest that in these four nations, beliefs about the inequality in who causes climate change and who suffers its worst consequences may be relevant to community support for the implementation of climate aid policy.

Nature Africa (2025)

Marina Joubert, Niels G. Mede, Viktoria Cologna & Patrick O. Ansah