New survey says science communicators should listen to the people in the middle
Every August, laboratories open their doors, astronomers set up telescopes for public view and thousands of researchers spend a week explaining what they do to anyone who will listen. National Science Week is built on a simple premise: if people knew more about science, they would think better of it.
The third Australian Beliefs and Attitudes Towards Science Survey, released this week by the Australian National University, suggests the premise is only half right, and that the missing half is the listening part of science communication.
Co-author Dr Matthew Nurse said the survey found that scientists are deeply respected. Of the 1,255 people surveyed, 87 per cent said scientists contribute at least some benefit to the wellbeing of Australian society, 88 per cent rated science as prestigious work, and 70 per cent agreed that scientists are trustworthy. Nearly three-quarters said science has made life easier for most people.
“Australians have not turned against scientists,” said Dr Nurse. “They continue to regard scientific work as valuable, they consider it prestigious, and most importantly they believe scientists are willing to listen to their ideas and concerns.”
The change since the survey's earlier waves, in 2017 and 2018, was not a hardening of opposition to science. It was the growth of a group in the middle who decline to take a position at all. Climate change is the clearest case. Just 43 per cent of participants said there was solid evidence the Earth has warmed over recent decades, down from around 80 per cent in the two earlier surveys. But outright rejection of climate science did not rise to fill the gap. It fell slightly, from 17 per cent to 14. What grew was the share saying the evidence was mixed, from around one per cent in 2018 to 32 per cent now.
“Uncertainty is extremely healthy when scientific evidence is new or evolving," Dr Nurse said. "But more people are sitting on the fence when it comes to some areas where the scientific evidence is particularly strong.
“Fewer people are rejecting the evidence outright. More people are just unsure what to make of it.”
The same shape recurs across the survey. Roughly a third of participants took no position on bioengineered organs for transplant or on the safety of genetically modified food, two in five took none on GM crops. Of seven applications of science put to participants, from nuclear power to fracking to gene technologies for conservation, not one commanded majority support, yet outright opposition was mostly low. In nearly every case, many people were undecided. Many of these areas are open to scientific debate, and some are not. Regardless of where the science is at, people felt unsure about it.
Australians also feel less confident when it came to being well informed about science. Those who felt very or fairly well informed about science fell from 70 per cent in 2017 to 55 per cent. Interest in science remains broad but has become shallower. The proportion of people who were very interested in new medical discoveries dropped from 64 per cent to 35, and in new scientific discoveries from 61 to 39.
For science communicators, that is a different problem from opposition, and requires a nuanced and evidence-informed approach to communication. Which is where the survey's most useful finding for the profession sits. Asked to rate sixteen occupations on their willingness to listen to other people's thoughts, ideas and concerns, participants put scientists third, behind only doctors and teachers, and well ahead of journalists and politicians.
"In communication that is a considerable asset, and one that many other occupations would rightly envy," Dr Nurse said. "But we're not making enough use of it. National Science Week is the time of year when many scientists talk to the rest of Australia. Based on this report, we should be listening more than talking, and particularly to the people in the middle."
Dr Nurse said as the report found that 53 per cent of Australians engage in interpersonal communication involving current events at least weekly, that meant that we should never forget the power of genuine conversation.
However, there was some pleasing consensus in one particular area. Four in five participants agreed that all Australians share a responsibility to help protect the country from pests, diseases and invasive species, even when it is inconvenient. This was particularly important given the survey was undertaken when highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 was detected among Australian birds.
However, the survey also found 42 per cent of Australians now get news through generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini and Claude at least weekly, putting those tools ahead of Reddit, X and podcasts. Notably, more participants named inaccuracy as a concern about AI (27 per cent) than named accurate information as a benefit (16 per cent). People are generally using a source they do not entirely trust, which suggests an opportunity for anyone willing to be more available than a chatbot.
Dr Nurse said listening is a skill that can be taught. Researchers who want to learn to communicate with the public rather than simply listen to them can study how at the Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science at ANU, which has trained scientists in public engagement for more than three decades.
The Australian Beliefs and Attitudes Towards Science Survey 2026 is available.