A Scientist's Oath.

Data on the perceptions of scientists suggest a moderate public distrust of scientist's motivations. Bettridge et al. suggest scientist's reluctance to engage the public on controversial ethical issues may be a contributing factor. The authors propose a Scientist's Oath to send a clear message to the public about our ideals.

Understanding 'flexing': the impact on mental health and public trust.

BACKGROUND: This correspondence explores the rising phenomenon of 'flexing' on social media, characterized by flaunting wealth and luxurious lifestyles. This trend is particularly prominent among influencers and some public officials in Indonesia. PROBLEM: We identify 'flexing' as a behavior that potentially harms both mental health and societal trust, creating an environment that contrasts starkly with the beneficial practice of 'sharenting,' which promotes sharing parental experiences for mutual support and healing. IMPLICATIONS: The influence of 'flexing' on public mental health and trust in the tax system requires thorough examination. CONCLUSION: Given its adverse effects, the correspondence emphasizes the need for comprehensive measures to address this issue.

Institutional trust is a distinct construct related to vaccine hesitancy and refusal.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy is driven by a heterogeneous and changing set of psychological, social and historical phenomena, requiring multidisciplinary approaches to its study and intervention. Past research has brought to light instances of both interpersonal and institutional trust playing an important role in vaccine uptake. However, no comprehensive study to date has specifically assessed the relative importance of these two categories of trust as they relate to vaccine behaviors and attitudes. METHODS: In this paper, we examine the relationship between interpersonal and institutional trust and four measures related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and one measure related to general vaccine hesitancy. We hypothesize that, across measures, individuals with vaccine hesitant attitudes and behaviors have lower trust-especially in institutions-than those who are not hesitant. We test this hypothesis in a sample of 1541 Canadians. RESULTS: A deficit in both interpersonal and institutional trust was associated with higher levels of vaccine hesitant attitudes and behaviors. However, institutional trust was significantly lower than interpersonal trust in those with high hesitancy scores, suggesting that the two types of trust can be thought of as distinct constructs in the context of vaccine hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we suggest that diminished institutional trust plays a crucial role in vaccine hesitancy. We propose that this may contribute to a tendency to instead place trust in interpersonally propagated belief systems, which may be more strongly misaligned with mainstream evidence and thus support vaccine hesitancy attitudes. We offer strategies rooted in these observations for creating public health messages designed to enhance vaccine uptake.

Medical capacity investment for epidemic disease: The effects of policymaker's confidence and public trust.

Due to the server bed shortage, which has raised ethical dilemmas in the earliest days of the COVID-19 crisis, medical capacity investment has become a vital decision-making issue in the attempt to contain the epidemic. Furthermore, economic strength has failed to explain the significant performance difference across countries in combatting COVID-19. Unlike common diseases, epidemic diseases add substantial unpredictability, complexity, and uncertainty to decision-making. Knowledge miscalibration on epidemiological uncertainties by policymaker's over- and underconfidence can seriously impact policymaking. Ineffective risk communication may lead to conflicting and incoherent information transmission. As a result, public reactions and attitudes could be influenced by policymakers' confidence due to the level of public trust, which eventually affects the degree to which an epidemic spreads. To uncover the impacts of policymakers' confidence and public trust on the medical capacity investment, we establish epidemic diffusion models to characterize how transmission evolves with (and without) vaccination and frame the capacity investment problem as a newsvendor problem. Our results show that if the public fully trusts the public health experts, the policymaker's behavioral bias is always harmful, but its effect on cost increment is marginal. If a policymaker's behavior induces public reactions due to public trust, both the spread of the epidemic and the overall performance will be significantly affected, but such impacts are not always harmful. Decision bias may be beneficial when policymakers are pessimistic or highly overconfident. Having an opportunity to amend initially biased decisions can debias a particular topic but has a limited cost-saving effect.

Polarization, the Pandemic, and Public Trust in Health System Actors.

CONTEXT: Public opinion on the performance of health system actors is polarized today, but it remains unclear which actors enjoy the most (least) trust among Democrats and Republicans, whether the Covid-19 pandemic has influenced how people view their own physicians, and whether doctors have retained the ability to influence public beliefs about policy issues. METHODS: We conducted two national surveys in 2022 and 2023 to examine these questions. FINDINGS: Democrats rate the performance of medical research scientists and public health experts during the pandemic more highly than do Republicans and independents. About three in ten Republicans say that the pandemic decreased their trust in their personal doctors. Nonetheless, most Americans report confidence in physicians. We replicate the findings of Gerber et al. (2014) to demonstrate that respondents continue to have more positive views of doctors than other professionals, and that public opinion is responsive to cues from a doctors' group. CONCLUSIONS: What polarizes Democrats and Republicans today is not whether medical scientists and public health experts are competent, but whether the advice offered by these actors is in the public interest and should guide policymakers' decisions. Democrats strongly believe the answer to these questions is yes, while Republicans exhibit skepticism.

Trust and Regulation: Assuring Scientific Independence in the FDA's Emergency Use Authorization Process.

Since 2004, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has had the authority to allow access to unapproved medical products via the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) pathway during times of emergency. It was rarely used until the COVID-19 pandemic, when concerns arose regarding the role of political pressure in the FDA's issuance of some EUAs, such as for hydroxychloroquine. Although US government officials should be responsive to the public, democratic accountability must be balanced against the need for thoughtful science-based decision-making. Inadequate agency independence can diminish public confidence in government leaders and the FDA. To consider whether reform of the EUA process might be appropriate, we considered three possible sources of inspiration for balancing independence and accountability in government scientific decision-making: models in other countries, models in other US agencies, and models within the FDA itself. Strategies used in these settings include: (1) expanding the role of advisory committees, (2) increasing transparency of the agency's decision-making process and supporting rationale, and (3) improving management of internal agency disagreement. Such reforms could improve public trust in public health regulation both related to and separate from future emergencies.

Drivers of social acceptance of natural-resource management: A comparison of the public and professionals in California.

The social impacts of natural resource management are challenging to evaluate because their perceived benefits and costs vary across stakeholder groups. Nevertheless, ensuring social acceptance is essential to building public support for adaptive measures required for the sustainable management of ecosystems in a warming climate. Based on surveys with both members of the public and natural-resource professionals in California, we applied structural-equation modeling to examine how psychological factors impact individuals' attitudes toward management's capacity to reduce the impacts of disturbance events, including wildfires, smoke from wildfires, drought, water shortages, tree mortality, and utility failure. We found the members of the public more optimistic than natural-resource professionals, perceiving management capacity to be on average 3.04 points higher (of 10) and displaying higher levels of trust of the government on both the state (Δ = 11%) and federal levels (Δ = 19%). Personal experience with natural-resource events had a positive effect on perceived management in both the public (1.26) and the professional samples (5.05), whereas perceived future risk had a negative effect within both samples (professional = -0.91, public = -0.45). In addition, higher trust and perceived management effectiveness were also linked with higher perceptions of management capacity in the public sample (1.81 versus 1.24), which could affect the acceptance of management actions. Continued social acceptance in a period of increasing risk may depend on managers sharing personal experiences and risk perception when communicating with the public. The contemporary shift toward multibenefit aims is an important part of that message.

The Value-Free Ideal of Science: A Useful Fiction? A Review of Non-epistemic Reasons for the Research Integrity Community.

Even if the "value-free ideal of science" (VFI) were an unattainable goal, one could ask: can it be a useful fiction, one that is beneficial for the research community and society? This question is particularly crucial for scholars and institutions concerned with research integrity (RI), as one cannot offer normative guidance to researchers without making some assumptions about what ideal scientific research looks like. Despite the insofar little interaction between scholars studying RI and those working on values in science, the overlap of topics and interests make collaboration between the two fields promising for understanding research and its ethics. Here, we identify-for the use of RI scholars-the non-epistemic reasons (societal, political, professional) for and against the VFI considered in the literature. All of these are concerned with the beneficial or detrimental consequences that endorsing the VFI would have on society, policy-making, or the scientific community, with some authors appealing to the same principles to argue for opposite positions. Though most of the reviewed articles do not endorse the VFI, it is generally agreed that some constraints have to be put on the use of non-epistemic values. Disagreement on the utility of the VFI lies both on the different epistemic-descriptive positions taken by different authors, and on the scarcity of relevant empirical studies. Engaging critically with the reasons here identified and more in general with the values in science debate will help the RI community decide whether the VFI should be included in future codes of conduct.

Suspecting the Figures: What Church Leaders Think About Government's Commitment to Combating COVID-19 in Nigeria.

Public trust in government can significantly determine the outcome of health policies in any society. Hence, studies have been gauging peoples' level of trust in their governments' commitment and capacity to win the fight against COVID-19. However, these studies have omitted religious leaders. This is despite the fact that religious leaders play key roles in the area of health in many societies. The present study, therefore, explored the opinions church leaders have about the credibility of the COVID-19 statistics and other government responses in Nigeria. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 18 church leaders drawn from Anglican, Catholic, and Pentecostal churches in Nigeria. A descriptive narrative approach was employed in the thematic organization and analysis of data. Findings show that only one participant expressed confidence in the credibility of the COVID-19 statistics and other government's responses. The rest, with the exception of one participant who was uncertain, was distributed between those who believe the statistics and other government efforts are exaggerated and those who believe they are false. The study also found that denominational affiliation mattered with respect to the perceptions about the credibility of the COVID-19 statistics and other government responses. Implications of findings for policy and research are discussed.

Learning about COVID-19: sources of information, public trust, and contact tracing during the pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between public attitudes, beliefs, and information seeking about the COVID-19 pandemic and willingness to participate in contact tracing in Michigan. METHODS: Using data from the quarterly Michigan State of the State survey conducted in May 2020 (n = 1000), we conducted multiple regression analyses to identify factors associated with willingness to participate in COVID-19 contact tracing efforts. RESULTS: Perceived threat of the pandemic to personal health (B = 0.59, p = <.00, Ref = No threat) and general trust in the health system (B = 0.17, p < 0.001), were the strongest positive predictors of willingness to participate in contact tracing. Concern about misinformation was also positively associated with willingness to participate in contact tracing (B = 0.30, p < 0.001; Ref = No concern). Trust in information from public health institutions was positively associated with willingness to participate in contact tracing, although these institutions were not necessarily the main sources of information about COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Policy makers can enhance willingness to participate in public health efforts such as contact tracing during infectious disease outbreaks by helping the public appreciate the seriousness of the public health threat and communicating trustworthy information through accessible channels.

Seemingly bounded knowledge, trust, and public acceptance: How does citizen's environmental knowledge affect facility siting?

Understanding the mechanism of public perception and behavior towards environmental goods provision is essential for effective sustainable governance. This paper studies how citizens' self-reported environmental knowledge affects their trust in public service providers and subsequently their decisions about accepting the provision of a pollution management facility in their neighborhood. Utilizing unique survey data on the siting of a facility for waste incineration in Guangzhou, China, we find that the public's perceived environmental knowledge damages their trust in the operator, which lowers their acceptance of the facility siting, while damage to their trust in the government is negligible. In addition, we find that citizens' preferences for the type of information disclosed and the channels used for disclosure can affect public trust and thus acceptance of the facility siting. Therefore, policy suggestions for urban planning for sustainability are that the urban planner and policy maker can mitigate the negative consequences of bounded environmental knowledge by ensuring there is appropriate information disclosure. This study broadens our understanding of public recognition and acceptance of environmental goods provision and provides practical suggestions for sustainable development.

Expanding and Evaluating Public Satisfaction with Wildlife Governance: Insights from Deer Management in Indiana, USA.

Wildlife agencies in North America desire to incorporate broader public interests into decision-making so they can realize the principle of governing wildlife in the public trust. Public satisfaction is a key component of good governance but evaluating satisfaction with wildlife management focuses on traditional user experiences rather than perceptions of agency performance. We draw from political science, business, and conservation social science to develop a multidimensional concept of satisfaction with wildlife management that includes agency performance, service quality, trust in the managing agency, and informational trust. We use data collected from a 2021 survey of Indiana residents to analyze the social and cognitive determinants of satisfaction with white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) management. Quantile regression models revealed that respondents' acceptability of management methods and deer-related concerns most strongly affected performance and quality components, whereas respondent characteristics mostly affected trust components of the index. Future research should associate satisfaction with key variables we did not fully capture including perceived control, psychological distance, and norms of interaction between wildlife agencies and the public. Expanding agency conceptions of public satisfaction represents a critical step toward public trust thinking and the practice of good wildlife governance in North America.

US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization: Glass Half Full or Glass Half Empty?

Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued emergency use authorization (EUA) for convalescent plasma (CP) for the treatment of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 based on a non-peer-reviewed, open-label, observational study. Issuance of an EUA without a proven randomized, controlled trial (RCT) sets a dangerous precedent since the premature action drives healthcare providers and patients away from RCTs that are essential for determining the efficacy and safety of CP. More caution should have been taken based on what was learned from the recent debacle related to the rescinded EUA of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, which were approved initially based on an anecdotal report. The FDA process for determining efficacy and safety must be based solely on data from RCTs in order to sustain public and professional trust for future treatment and vaccine efforts to be successful.

Mindfulness as key in easing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

The public's trust in the COVID-19 vaccination program is still a problem, especially in the Philippines. Many have suggested that the government and even healthcare workers should exhaust all their efforts to educate the public about the nature of the vaccines. However, rebuilding public trust is not only a governmental concern, but should also be taken as a personal responsibility. Thus, this paper argues that mindfulness through critical thinking is a necessary key in boosting the vaccination program.

Building public trust: a response to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy predicament.

With the rollout of vaccines against COVID-19, an optimistic and a negative attitude among people have arisen. Surprisingly, surveys among people reveal that there is a significant rate of distrust against the vaccines. In a recent short report published in this journal, vaccine hesitancy was found out among medical students. Hence, wide array of research has been springing, recommending various approaches in assisting authorities deal with vaccine hesitancy such as proper and effective strategic communication as a solution. This study suggests however that a more 'localized' public education and role-modelling from public officials and health authorities can help a lot in building public trust. The study aims to contribute to the further development of public health mechanisms in the rolling-out and distribution of vaccines against COVID-19.

Common good and public service as vital components for government officials in promoting COVID-19 vaccination.

Recent reports show that there is resistance in certain countries in regard with receiving COVID-19 vaccination. Different factors contribute to this resistance. With this, if we are to promote COVID-19 vaccination, government officials must build public trust so that the hesitancy among the citizens will be lessened. Thus, this paper proposes that in building public trust, the true essence of common good and public service must be seen from the officials so that their constituents will trust them with their decisions.

Building public trust in COVID-19 vaccines through the Catholic Church in the Philippines.

Due to the expedited production of the COVID-19 vaccines and other issues related to it, many Filipinos are hesitant to receive the inoculation program set by the government. Because of this, it is crucial to gain public trust for the COVID-19 vaccines. This paper argues that the Catholic Church, being an influential institution in the Philippines, can help in building public trust in COVID-19 vaccines in the country.

Understanding public trust in water managers: Findings from the Netherlands.

Public trust in water managers is often considered an important precondition for the effective implementation of sustainable water-management practices. Although it is well known that general public trust in government institutions is under pressure, much less is known in the literature on water governance whether such distrust also affects general and task-specific trust of the wider public in water managers. In addition, empirical studies on the determinants of such trust seem to be scarce. To fill those gaps, this study aims to measure general and task-specific public trust in water managers in the Netherlands and to assess how a selected group of potential determinants is related to general- and task-specific trust in water managers. To this end, we employ an original survey among a representative sample of the Dutch population (N = 2262). We find that trust in water managers in the Netherlands is generally high, but that it also comes with some task-specific variations. People have more trust in the flood-protection capacities of the water managers than in the capacities to successfully manage surface-water quality, nature conservation, and drought management. Using linear regression models, we subsequently find that individual-level variations in trust in water managers are best explained by one's general level of political trust. Additionally, we also show that both risk perceptions and self-evaluations of how informed people feel themselves about water management are important factors with (curvilinear) relations with trust in water managers. Overall, we conclude that water managers are under specific conditions able to build themselves well-established reputations and relatively high trust levels based on their performances. Nevertheless, trust development is far from entirely in the hands of the water managers themselves as we also conclude that trust evaluations of water managers are not immune from negative generalized political evaluations and public perceptions on water related risks.

Common asset trusts to effectively steward natural capital and ecosystem services at multiple scales.

Ecosystems (natural capital) produce a range of benefits to humans. Natural capital is best thought of as common property since many of the ecosystem services it helps produce are non-rival and/or non-excludable. Private property regimes and markets alone are ineffective and inappropriate institutions to manage them sustainably. These systems can be better managed as commons, using more nuanced private and community property rights and Common Asset Trusts (CATs), with legal precedent in the Public Trust Doctrine. Effective CATs embody a generalized version of Elinore Ostrom's eight core design principles for sustainable commons management: (1) shared identity and purpose; (2) equitable distribution of contributions and benefits; (3) fair and inclusive decision-making; (4) monitoring agreed behaviours; (5) graduated responses; (6) fast and fair conflict resolution; (7) authority to self-govern; and (8) collaborative relations with other groups and spatial scales. Here, we describe a few existing and proposed systems that approximate effective CATs. We also suggest how Costa Rica can transform its existing payment for ecosystem services (PES) scheme into a national CAT. Finally, we describe how CATs can facilitate more fair and effective public/private partnerships (PPPs) to invest in natural capital and ecosystem services.

Digital contact tracing and exposure notification: ethical guidance for trustworthy pandemic management.

There is growing interest in contact tracing apps (CT apps) for pandemic management. It is crucial to consider ethical requirements before, while, and after implementing such apps. In this paper, we illustrate the complexity and multiplicity of the ethical considerations by presenting an ethical framework for a responsible design and implementation of CT apps. Using this framework as a starting point, we briefly highlight the interconnection of social and political contexts, available measures of pandemic management, and a multi-layer assessment of CT apps. We will discuss some trade-offs that arise from this perspective. We then suggest that public trust is of major importance for population uptake of contact tracing apps. Hasty, ill-prepared or badly communicated implementations of CT apps will likely undermine public trust, and as such, risk impeding general effectiveness.