{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021940928270042195, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006751054852320675, 'mean_word_length': 5.177083333333333, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Facing the pandemic with trust in science

How essential is trust in science to prevent the spread of COVID-19? Previous work shows that people who trust in science are more likely to comply with official guidelines, which suggests that higher levels of compliance could be achieved by improving trust in science. However, analysis of a global dataset (n=4341) suggests otherwise. Trust in science had a small, indirect effect on adherence to the rules. It affected adherence only insofar as it predicted people's approval of prevention measures such as social distancing. Trust in science also mediated the relationship between political ideology and approval of the measures (more conservative people trusted science less and in turn approved of the measures less). These effects varied across countries, and were especially different in the USA. Overall, these results mean that any increase in trust in science is unlikely to yield strong immediate improvements in following COVID-19 rules. Nonetheless, given its relationships with both ideology and individuals' attitudes to the measures, trust in science may be leveraged to yield longer-term and more sustained social benefits.