Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Cavojová, Vladimíra; Srol, Jakub; Ballová Mikusková, Eva.
Afiliación
  • Cavojová V; Institute of Experimental Psychology, Centre of Social and Psychological Sciences, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, 841 04 Bratislava, Slovakia.
  • Srol J; Institute of Experimental Psychology, Centre of Social and Psychological Sciences, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, 841 04 Bratislava, Slovakia.
  • Ballová Mikusková E; Institute of Experimental Psychology, Centre of Social and Psychological Sciences, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, 841 04 Bratislava, Slovakia.
Curr Psychol ; : 1-15, 2023 Jan 26.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36718393
Scientific reasoning and trust in science are two facets of science understanding. This paper examines the contribution of science understanding, over and above analytic thinking, to the endorsement of conspiracy and pseudoscientific beliefs about COVID-19 and behavioral intentions to engage in the recommended preventive behavior. We examined the direct and indirect effects of science understanding on normative health behavior in a representative sample of the Slovak population (N = 1024). The results showed more support for the indirect pathway: individuals with a better understanding of science generally had fewer epistemically suspect beliefs and as a consequence tended to behave more in line with the evidence-based guidelines and get vaccinated. Neither scientific reasoning nor trust in science directly predicted non-compliance with preventive measures, but analytic thinking correlated positively with non-compliance with preventive measures. The strongest predictor of epistemically suspect beliefs was trust in science, which also directly predicted the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Therefore, reasoning about which experts or sources to believe (second-order scientific reasoning) has become more important than directly evaluating the original evidence (first-order scientific reasoning). Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-023-04284-y.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Curr Psychol Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Eslovaquia Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Curr Psychol Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Eslovaquia Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos