↓ Skip to main content

The Role of Conspiracist Ideation and Worldviews in Predicting Rejection of Science

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
462 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
591 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Role of Conspiracist Ideation and Worldviews in Predicting Rejection of Science
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0075637
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephan Lewandowsky, Gilles E. Gignac, Klaus Oberauer

Abstract

Among American Conservatives, but not Liberals, trust in science has been declining since the 1970's. Climate science has become particularly polarized, with Conservatives being more likely than Liberals to reject the notion that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the globe. Conversely, opposition to genetically-modified (GM) foods and vaccinations is often ascribed to the political Left although reliable data are lacking. There are also growing indications that rejection of science is suffused by conspiracist ideation, that is the general tendency to endorse conspiracy theories including the specific beliefs that inconvenient scientific findings constitute a "hoax."

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 246 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 591 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 577 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 93 16%
Student > Bachelor 93 16%
Researcher 79 13%
Student > Master 73 12%
Professor 28 5%
Other 93 16%
Unknown 132 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 165 28%
Social Sciences 105 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 4%
Environmental Science 16 3%
Other 98 17%
Unknown 156 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 795. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 March 2024.
All research outputs
#24,536
of 25,905,864 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#392
of 225,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107
of 221,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#8
of 5,036 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,905,864 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,916 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 221,358 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,036 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.