Thông tin tài nguyên

Trumpism, climate and COVID: Social bases of the new science rejection

pmc-PMC10781192.pdf · Phiên bản 1 · 20 trang

18
Bản gốc
Trang 20 · Đoạn 58Vị trí nguồn

101. Nisbet E.C., Cooper K.E & Garrett R.K. 2015. “The partisan brain: How dissonant science messages lead conservatives and liberals to (dis)trust science.” Annals of the AAPSS. 658(1):36–66. https://doi. org/10.1177/0002716214555474 102. Kahan D.M., H-Jenkins-Smith & D. Braman. 2011. “Cultural cognition of the scientific consensus.” Journal of Risk Research 14(2):147–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2010.511246 103. Ayala F.J. 2008. “Science, evolution, and creationism.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences of the United States of America 105(1):3–4. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0711608105 PMID: 18178613 104. Schnaiberg A. 1977. “Obstacles to environmental research by scientists and technologists: A social structural analysis.” Social Problems 24:500–20. https://doi.org/10.2307/800121 105. Schnaiberg A. 1980. The Environment: From Surplus to Scarcity. New York: Oxford University Press. 106. McCright A.M., Dentzman K., Charters M. & Dietz T. 2013. “The influence of political ideology on trust in science.” Environmental Research Letters 8(4):044029. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/4/ 044029 107. Motta M., Motta G. & Stecula D. 2023. “Sick as a dog? The prevalence, politicization, and health policy consequences of canine vaccine hesitancy (CVH).” Vaccine 41:5946–5950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. vaccine.2023.08.059 PMID: 37640567 108. Merkley E. 2020. “Anti-intellectualism, populism, and motivated resistance to expert consensus.” Pub- lic Opinion Quarterly 84:24–48. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfz053

Trang 20 · Đoạn 59Vị trí nguồn

109. Nichols T. 2017. The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 110. Eichengreen B. 2018. The Populist Temptation: Economic Grievance and Political Reaction in the Modern Era. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 111. Diaz Ruiz C. & Nilsson T. 2022. “Disinformation and echo chambers: How disinformation circulates in social media through identity-driven controversies.” Journal of Public Policy and Marketing https://doi. org/10.1177/07439156221103852 112. Salvanto A., Khanna K., De Pinto J. & Backus F. 2023. “CBS News poll finds Trump’s big lead grows, as GOP voters dismiss indictments.” CBS News, August 20. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump- poll-indictments-2023-08-20 113. Bump P. 2023. “Trumpworld is a bubble within a bubble.” Washington Post, August 21. https://www. washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/21/trump-base-fox-news-debate/ 114. Jong-Fast M. 2023. “Not up for debate: Republicans can’t quit Trump.” Vanity Fair, August 23. https:// www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/08/donald-trump-republican-debate 115. McCright A.M., Dunlap R.E. & Marquart-Pyatt S.T. 2015. “Political ideology and views about climate change in the European Union.” Environmental Politics 25(2):338–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09644016.2015.1090371 116. Hornsey M.J., Harris E.A. & Fielding K.S. 2018. “Relationships among conspiratorial beliefs, conserva- tism and climate scepticism across nations.” Nature Climate Change https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558- 018-0157-2

Trang 20 · Đoạn 60Vị trí nguồn

117. Tesler M. 2018. “Elite domination of public doubts about climate change (not evolution).” Political Com- munication 35(2):306–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2017.1380092 118. Czarnek G., Kossowska M. & Szwed P. 2021. “Right-wing ideology reduces the effects of education on climate change beliefs in more developed countries.” Nature Climate Change. https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41558-020-00930-6 119. Kulin J., Seva¨ I.J. & Dunlap R.E. 2021. “Nationalist ideology, rightwing populism, and public views about climate change in Europe.” Environmental Politics. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2021. 1898879 PLOS ONE Trumpism, climate and COVID PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293059 January 10, 2024 20 / 20