Hábitos científicos y populismo científico en estudiantes del programa Workin Adult de la Universidad Privada del Norte

Luis Antonio  Tejada Vargas

doi:10.59169/pentaciencias.v8i1.1693

Authors

Luis Antonio Tejada Vargas Universidad Privada del Norte – Lima https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5588-3328

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59169/pentaciencias.v8i1.1693

Keywords:

scientific habits; scientific populism; critical thinking; epistemic authority; higher education

Abstract

Scientific habits are cognitive dispositions that enable individuals to evaluate information, analyze arguments, and make evidence-based decisions, while scientific populism represents a form of skepticism that privileges popular common sense over the epistemic authority of the scientific community. This study examined the level of scientific habits and scientific populism among university students in the Working Adult program, as well as the relationship between the two variables. A non-experimental, cross-sectional, descriptive-correlational design was used with 242 students enrolled in the Research Methodology course at a private university in Lima, Peru. The instruments used were the scientific habits scale based on Gauld (1982, 2005) and validated by Çalik and Coll (2012), and the SciPop scale developed by Mede et al. (2021) to measure scientific populism, both with a five-option Likert format. The results revealed that scientific habits reached a medium-low level (M = 24.1, SD = 3.6), with 52.1% of students falling into disagreement categories, reflecting self-criticism about epistemic competencies; respect for evidence emerged as the least developed dimension. Scientific populism showed low-moderate levels (M = 61.3, SD = 6.7), characterized by predominant neutrality (61.2%) rather than active rejection of science. Correlational analysis using Spearman's Rho showed a moderate-strong negative association between scientific habits and scientific populism (ρ = -0.542, p = 0.028), with an exceptionally robust correlation between scientific habits and demands for sovereignty in decision-making (ρ = -0.869, p = 0.044). It is concluded that the development of scientific habits functions as a differentiated protective factor against specific dimensions of scientific populism, especially against demands for epistemic egalitarianism. The findings support the need to integrate the strengthening of epistemic competencies as a cross-cutting component of the curriculum in flexible higher education programs, constituting a scientific literacy strategy for working adult students.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Algan, Y., Cohen, D., Davoine, E., Foucault, M., & Stantcheva, S. (2021). Trust in scientists in times of pandemic: Panel evidence from 12 countries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(40), e2108576118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2108576118

Çalik, M., & Coll, R. K. (2012). Investigating Socioscientific Issues via Scientific Habits of Mind: Development and validation of the Scientific Habits of Mind Survey. International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), 1909-1930. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.685197

Coll, R. K., Taylor, N., & Lay, M. C. (2009). Scientists’ Habits of Mind as Evidenced by the Interaction Between their Science Training and Religious Beliefs. International Journal of Science Education, 31(6), 725-755. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701762621

Cologna, V., Mede, N. G., Berger, S., Besley, J., Brick, C., Joubert, M., Maibach, E. W., Mihelj, S., Oreskes, N., Schäfer, M. S., Van Der Linden, S., Abdul Aziz, N. I., Abdulsalam, S., Shamsi, N. A., Aczel, B., Adinugroho, I., Alabrese, E., Aldoh, A., Alfano, M., … Zwaan, R. A. (2025). Trust in scientists and their role in society across 68 countries. Nature Human Behaviour, 9(4), 713-730. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02090-5

Douglas, K. M. (2021). Are Conspiracy Theories Harmless? The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 24, e13. https://doi.org/10.1017/SJP.2021.10

Eichengreen, B., Aksoy, C. G., & Saka, O. (2021). Revenge of the experts: Will COVID-19 renew or diminish public trust in science? Journal of Public Economics, 193, 104343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104343

Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología (FECYT), Díaz-Catalán, C., & Cabrera Álvarez, P. (2024). Confianza en la ciencia y populismo científico en España. Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.58121/A3WY-2444

Gauld, C. (1982). The scientific attitude and science education: A critical reappraisal. Science Education, 66(1), 109-121. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730660113

Gauld, C. F. (2005). Habits of Mind, Scholarship and Decision Making in Science and Religion. Science & Education, 14(3-5), 291-308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-004-1997-x

Harambam, J., & Aupers, S. (2015). Contesting epistemic authority: Conspiracy theories on the boundaries of science. Public Understanding of Science, 24(4), 466-480. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662514559891

Krause, N. M., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Xenos, M. A., & Franke, K. (2019). The Polls—Trends. Public Opinion Quarterly, nfz041. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfz041

Lerner, B., Hubner, A. Y., & Shulman, H. C. (2025). Science populism impacts perceptions of credibility across scientific professions. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 28465. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-14115-8

Mede, N. G., Schäfer, M. S., & Füchslin, T. (2021). The SciPop Scale for Measuring Science-Related Populist Attitudes in Surveys: Development, Test, and Validation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 33(2), 273-293. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edaa026

Mede, N. G., Schäfer, M. S., Metag, J., & Klinger, K. (2022). Who supports science-related populism? A nationally representative survey on the prevalence and explanatory factors of populist attitudes toward science in Switzerland. PLOS ONE, 17(8), e0271204. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0271204

Mudde, C., & Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2019). Populismo: Una breve introducción. Alianza Editorial.

Ollé, C., López-Borrull, A., Melero, R., Boté-Vericad, J.-J., Rodríguez-Gairín, J.-M., & Abadal, E. (2023). Habits and perceptions regarding open science by researchers from Spanish institutions. PLOS ONE, 18(7), e0288313. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288313

Rutjens, B. T., Sengupta, N., Der Lee, R. V., Van Koningsbruggen, G. M., Martens, J. P., Rabelo, A., & Sutton, R. M. (2022). Science Skepticism Across 24 Countries. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(1), 102-117. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211001329

Rutjens, B. T., & Van Der Lee, R. (2020). Spiritual skepticism? Heterogeneous science skepticism in the Netherlands. Public Understanding of Science, 29(3), 335-352. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520908534

Saurette, P., & Gunster, S. (2011). Ears Wide Shut: Epistemological Populism, Argutainment and Canadian Conservative Talk Radio. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 44(1), 195-218. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423910001095

Tranter, B., Lester, L., Foxwell-Norton, K., & Palmer, M. A. (2023). In science we trust? Public trust in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections and accepting anthropogenic climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 32(6), 691-708. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625231165405

Ureta, C. (1997). Imagen de la Ciencia, prácticas y hábitos científicos de los investigadores en Ciencias de la Educación. http://www.redined.mec.es/oai/indexg.php?registro=008199800021.

Van Zoonen, L. (2012). I -Pistemology: Changing truth claims in popular and political culture. European Journal of Communication, 27(1), 56-67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323112438808

Winter, S., & Krämer, N. C. (2014). A question of credibility – Effects of source cues and recommendations on information selection on news sites and blogs. Communications, 39(4). https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2014-0020

Wiyarsi, A., & Çalik, M. (2019). Revisiting the scientific habits of mind scale for socio-scientific issues in the Indonesian context. International Journal of Science Education, 41(17), 2430-2447. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1683912

Zillich, A. F., Schlütz, D., Roehse, E.-M., Möhring, W., & Link, E. (2024). Populism, Research Integrity, and Trust. How Science-Related Populist Beliefs Shape the Relationship Between Ethical Conduct and Trust in Scientists. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 36(3), edae038. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edae038