Intertwining of science and partisan politics may impede constructive dialogue on science in policymaking, according to a new social science assessment. The focus is with the U.S. system of politics and it finds that policy citations of science have increased steadily over the last 25 years. However, the use to which this information is put differs along party lines.
The Northwestern University researchers analysed all congressional committee reports since 1995, committee hearings since 2001 and 191,118 policy documents published by 121 U.S.-based ideological think tanks after 1999. The scientists also looked at a large-scale publication and citation database that captures 122 million scientific publications across disciplines. Linking the two gave them an opportunity to examine the partisan differences in the use of science in policy.
The researchers also surveyed 3,500 U.S. political elites and public servants, asking how much they trust or distrust science, regardless of political party. They found 96% of Democratic elites either completely or partially trust scientists to disseminate unbiased knowledge, compared to 63.7% of Republican elites.
From the review, there is an indication that in the U.S. science is being used selectively to support preexisting beliefs or agendas.
Science may be more embraced in the public sphere now versus then, but when researchers analysed policy documents created by Democrat Party politicians versus their Republican counterparts, there was a clear disparity. They observed systematic differences in the amount, content and character of science they used.
In terms of openness to scientific thinking, Republican policymakers report lower levels of trust in scientists and scientific institutions than Democrats. It follows that Democrats are more likely to cite science in policy making documents, regardless of scientific field or policy issue.
In relation to this, it was found that Democratic-controlled committees were nearly 1.8 times more likely to cite science than those from Republican-controlled committees.
The researchers also noticed that under Democratic-control the House Energy and Commerce committee cited science on abortion, drunk driving, youth and e-cigarettes, energy production and infrastructure, gun violence and mental health.
Yet when Republicans controlled the committee they were more likely to cite science about health care insurance costs, air pollution, opioids or high-school athletic injuries. But even when they are focusing on the same policy or issue, they did not cite the same science.
Another interesting finding is how the two parties can use the same scientific reports and draw different conclusions, even when the data is presented objectively and with clear conclusions. Democrats and Republicans cite different science data, even when working on the same issue.
The study, “Partisan disparities in the use of science in policy,” was published today (April 24) in the journal Science.
