Scientific Literacy: Republicans/Conservatives vs. Democrats/Liberals

[renowiggum]

An interesting post:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/03/the-republican-fluency-with-science/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

One great observation - that Democrats tend to have clusters at the very educated and the very uneducated, while Republicans tend to cluster in the middle.

[Stuck in Seattle]

An interesting post:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/03/the-republican-fluency-with-science/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

One great observation - that Democrats tend to have clusters at the very educated and the very uneducated, while Republicans tend to cluster in the middle.
This stuff is always interesting but it doesn't really tell us much that is useful. How many people need to know any of these things to do well in their daily lives? A very small percentage. So while they had to learn this stuff while young they forget about it later as it simply doesn't matter. Unless you want to be on "Jeopardy".

[student4ever]

Interesting find Wiggum. I don't think it is any surprise that Democrats contain a broader variety people with different societal and financial situations. Also, maybe I'm missing something, but in the data, I don't see much difference between the three groups and liberals and conservatives are often tied; certainly not enough to make any claims one way or the other.

IMO, the issue isn't the ability to understand, it is the willingness to throw it away despite overwhelming evidence.

[NAN1025]

I agree with S4E, these values are not that far off from each other. For the most part, they are all within a few percentage points. With one exception:

Humans developed from non-humans 69 52 39

For a community that can (and should) pride itself on scientific literacy, this is incredibly glaring. Being a biochemist, this raises additional questions like "Do people understand what a gene is? Do people understand inheritance? Do people understand scientific theory in general?"

But this also leaves open the question of how many people were surveyed. Having an N value posted would be helpful.

[Stuck in Seattle]

I agree with S4E, these values are not that far off from each other. For the most part, they are all within a few percentage points. With one exception:

Humans developed from non-humans 69 52 39

For a community that can (and should) pride itself on scientific literacy, this is incredibly glaring. Being a biochemist, this raises additional questions like "Do people understand what a gene is? Do people understand inheritance? Do people understand scientific theory in general?"

But this also leaves open the question of how many people were surveyed. Having an N value posted would be helpful.
I think you might be shocked by the answers if you asked a large cross section people what a gene is. Biology is like geography. They don't use it, so they don't retain it. What percentage of Americans could point out Iraq or Libya on a map? Or even Germany? And not being able to do so impacts their lives in what ways?

[NAN1025]

Fair point, but I would imagine with all the talk about GMOs, evolution, and the biotechnology revolution we are in right now would at least trigger some interest/ understanding of the issues being discussed. Maybe I'm giving people too much credit, but I cannot believe that the average American is really as stupid as Jay Leno shows us. Or maybe I'm the fool.

[Stuck in Seattle]

Fair point, but I would imagine with all the talk about GMOs, evolution, and the biotechnology revolution we are in right now would at least trigger some interest/ understanding of the issues being discussed. Maybe I'm giving people too much credit, but I cannot believe that the average American is really as stupid as Jay Leno shows us. Or maybe I'm the fool.
They aren't...Leno only puts the dumbest ones on his Jaywalking bits. But most people aren't exceptionally curious about science, history or geography. They'll watch the occasional nature show and call it good. Or they'll watch some stupid History Channel program (they are mostly pretty bad in the areas I know well, so I assume they're bad with most others) and think they understand Roman history.

I've long contended that college is wasted on a significant percentage of those that attend and we're wasting resources (and driving up the cost while lowering the quality) by admitting them. They are there to get credentialed not educated and don't leave with any great accumulation of knowledge or with the ability (or desire) engage in critical thinking.

[Stuck in Seattle]

Oh, and when I point out that Americans aren't great at that stuff, I don't think Europeans are all that either. They laugh when Americans can't point out the European countries on a map...but how many Euros can point out Montana or Arizona on a map? Germany is the size of Montana, Austria is smaller than Maine, France is about the size of Texas and the UK smaller than Oregon. And none of them have much if any influence over their lives.