Why People Trust Research

If democratic policymaking increasingly relies on research-based evidence, its authority will increasingly depend on public trust in science and research. In a political context often described as “post-truth,” such trust has become contested, shaped by polarization, accusations of politicization, and struggles over the boundary between science and politics. Whereas one empirical strand of scholarship has focused on the characteristics of the groups of citizens that tend to distrust research versus the characteristics of those who tend to trust it, and more theoretical and normative strands of scholarship have focused on what could or should be reasons for trusting or distrusting science, few have studied empirically the arguments citizens themselves make for why they either trust or distrust research. This paper asks: What are the reasons citizens themselves state as the basis for their trust (or lack of trust) in research, and how do these reasons differ between groups with high and low overall trust? The analysis draws on a survey of approximately 1,300 respondents who answered the open-ended question “What is important for you to have trust in research”. Responses were coded inductively to capture the reasoning respondents themselves mobilize. Many justifications align with classic models of trust, particularly the distinction between perceived competence, integrity, and benevolent intentions (Mayer et al. 1995). However, the data also reveal trust criteria that are specific to research and insufficiently captured by standard frameworks. These criteria function as key epistemic cues through which respondents assess trustworthiness. Some of these correspond to well-known arguments from the public debate on the legitimacy of science and research, including the societal impact of research results, the use of scientific methods, and how research is funded. By focusing on the logics through which trust judgments are made rather than on trust levels alone, the paper aims to develop an empirically grounded typology of trust in research that is better suited to capturing how citizens relate to scientific knowledge. The contribution is thus exploratory, but we also explore potential causes and correlates of the reasons for trust in research. We examine whether the reasons vary between socio-demographic groups, and a closed survey item on respondents’ overall level of trust in research allows systematic comparison between high- and low-trust groups. In short, the paper seeks to clarify the foundations of trust in research as they are articulated by citizens themselves, and thereby to inform broader debates on post-truth politics, epistemic polarization, and the contested authority of science in contemporary democracies. Moving beyond descriptive accounts of variation in trust across citizen groups and their socio-demographic characteristics, and beyond more normative arguments for why one should trust science, this paper offers insights into how citizens actually reason on why to trust or distrust research, insight that may prove fruitful for the further developing politics of knowledge.