Can science literacy help individuals identify misinformation in everyday life?

Abstract

Abstract Certain science‐related topics elicit persistent public controversy, such as routine childhood vaccinations and anthropogenic climate change. Many people are misinformed about the scientific facts underlying these issues. In response, science educators have called for improvements in the public's science literacy, but it is not clear which components of science literacy would help individuals identify misinformation. In this position paper, we examine this issue and make two arguments. First, we unpack the construct of science literacy to the seven components identified by the National Academies, and argue that four of these components are most likely to help individuals identify misinformation in everyday life: (a) Understanding of scientific practices; (b) Identifying and judging appropriate scientific expertise, (c) Epistemic knowledge, and (d) Dispositions and habits of mind, for example, inquisitiveness and open‐mindedness. We also show that three of these four components are not commonly used in definitions of science literacy. Second, we posit that two opposite reasons explain why misinformation is so intractable: on the one hand, that individuals uncritically accept most information, even if it is false, and on the other hand, that they reject information that contradicts their worldview, even if it is true. Consequently, we argue that inculcating intellectual virtues, such as open‐mindedness, should be central to imparting science literacy and propose some implications for educational practice. Lastly, we point out some limitations of our arguments and offer recommendations for further research.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 195 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.