Trust or bust: science and technology’s underlying challenge

by Bronwyn Adams

“Science knows how to get answers for our most wicked problems… but without trust, all the science in the world is useless.”

MC Bernie Hobbs shared this statement as she welcomed leaders from research, government and industry to a CSIRO event at Queensland’s State Library to delve into the complex, nuanced and sometimes-thorny topic of trust in science and technology. 

Why trust matters

While international studies show Australia is relatively well-placed when it comes to trust in scientists, Dr Brett Sutton, Director of Health and Biosecurity at CSIRO, warned against taking this for granted.

“We can’t be complacent about the trust in science that we have in Australia; we can’t sit on our hands,” Brett said. “Things can switch, and we face multiple challenges as we go forward.”

Professor Margie Danchin from the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute shared that children in the US were dying from measles or sustaining neurological damage after being given dangerous doses of Vitamin A – an example of the real-world impact of declining trust in medical advice.

Barriers to trust: the misinformation machine

One of the biggest causes of the erosion in trust is the surge in misinformation – shared in good faith but factually incorrect – and disinformation, which is deliberately crafted to deceive.

These messages usually promise simple solutions to complex problems and tap into people’s emotions, making them highly shareable on social media, where they can quickly move from fringe groups to mainstream discourse.

Traditional media once acted as gatekeepers, bound by legal and ethical responsibilities, but shrinking newsrooms, the loss of specialist journalists and the loss of audiences has eroded this oversight. And by covering stories on misinformation under time pressure, traditional media can itself inadvertently amplify inaccurate information.

Worsening the problem is the decline in social cohesion, with fewer people having the community connections of a generation ago that could help counter misinformation.

Countering misinformation through communication

Despite the myriad of challenges, speakers identified many ways trust can be built and maintained.

While government and tech companies have critical roles in regulating the spread of mis/disinformation via social media, Margie Danchin urged scientists to fight back using some of the same tactics, including clear messaging and repetition, and being on platforms where people find information, like TikTok.

Susannah Eliott from the Australian Science Media Centre also had a message for scientists, saying misinformation could thrive during a crisis if they were too cautious about commenting.

“If there’s a period of time when there aren’t experts commenting on a crisis, that’s the time when people who want to push misinformation can jump in and it takes off – as an expert, you might not know everything but you know more than most people.” 

Dr Darren Saunders, Deputy NSW Chief Scientist, said countering misinformation can unintentionally amplify it, so it’s more effective to anticipate which stories might gain traction and get out in front of them – both with the public and behind the scenes with journalists. 

Engagement, equity and scientific literacy

Dr Justine Lacey, Research Director of CSIRO’s Responsible Innovation Future Science Platform, identified four drivers of public trust in science, with the most significant being the responsiveness of scientists to public concerns.

It’s a theme that was echoed throughout the day: people will trust science and technology when scientists engage with communities and shape their work accordingly.

This is particularly important for communities that can be marginalised as part of traditional decision-making process, such as Indigenous Australians, with Dr Lacey presenting research showing that most Australians didn’t feel the benefits of research were being felt equally across the nation.

Associate Professor Brownlie agreed with the need to engage with the community to understand their concerns, and to be mindful of the impact of change, especially when research could impact people’s livelihoods and family.

“We might have data but there is still a human component and that’s key to communicating that message,” he said.

Anna-Maria Arabia, CEO of the Australian Academy of Science, said we needed to create systems to widely share the benefits of scientific advances, and to ensure communities don’t feel left behind. This includes engaging communities across multiple platforms beyond publishing in academic journals. She also encouraged a united effort to counter disinformation which erodes public trust in science.

A reason for optimism

Amid the challenges, there’s encouraging signs when it comes to navigating trust in science and technology.

Susannah Eliott said that wherever she goes, everybody is interested in this issue.

“People see credible scientific information as important and want to work together – we shouldn’t take that for granted and we should find a way to get that enthusiasm around the table to work on solutions.” 

Dr Doug Hilton, CSIRO Chief Executive, said the undermining of science was part of a bigger problem of the broader erosion of civil institutions. But he is also hopeful.

 “I have optimism that Australians are willing to stand up for our civil institutions. This is not something we should just accept and sleepwalk into.”

Trust is not a certainty, but neither is its decline. What matters now is choosing to act before we drift past the tipping point.