ArticlePublic understanding of science (Bristol, England)2020
Spiritual skepticism? Heterogeneous science skepticism in the Netherlands.
Article in Public understanding of science (Bristol, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trust in scientists and doctors: The roles of faith, politics, education and gender.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2026Article
- Psychological Distance to Science: Psychometric Evaluation of the Swedish PSYDISC-Scale and as a Predictor of Science Skepticism.Scandinavian journal of psychology · 2025Article
- Trust in scientists and their role in society across 68 countries.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Owners of a conspiratorial heart? Investigating the longitudinal relationship between loneliness and conspiracy beliefs.The British journal of social psychology · 2025Article
- Spirituality, Conspiracy Beliefs, and Use of Complementary Medicine in Vaccine Attitudes: A Cross-Sectional Study in Northern Italy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- What made people (more) positive toward the COVID-19 vaccine? Exploring positive and negative deviance perspectives.BMC public health · 2025Article
- The role of worldviews, radicalization risk factors, and personality in harassment of scientists.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Stereotypes and social evaluations of scientists are related to different antecedents and outcomes.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2024Article
- Psychological Distance to Science as a Predictor of Science Skepticism Across Domains.Personality & social psychology bulletin · 2024Article
- Teaching the Nature of Science Improves Scientific Literacy Among Students Not Majoring in STEM.Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2024Article
- "The chilling effect": Medical scientists' responses to audience feedback on their media appearances during the COVID-19 pandemic.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2023Article
- Article
- Spirituality and religiosity contribute to ongoing COVID-19 vaccination rates: Comparing 195 regions around the world.Vaccine: X · 2022Article
- Religious affiliation and philosophical and moral beliefs about vaccines: A longitudinal study.Journal of health psychology · 2022Article
- Benefits and Pitfalls of Debunking Interventions to Counter mRNA Vaccination Misinformation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Science communication · 2022Article
- COVID-19-Related Predictors of Fear and Attitude to Vaccination Displayed by Polish Students.Vaccines · 2022Article
- Understanding, Trusting, and Applying Scientific Insights to Improve Your Health: A Latent Profile Analysis Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- How does information overload about COVID-19 vaccines influence individuals' vaccination intentions? The roles of cyberchondria, perceived risk, and vaccine skepticism.Computers in human behavior · 2022Article
- The Einstein effect provides global evidence for scientific source credibility effects and the influence of religiosity.Nature human behaviour · 2022Article
- The (im-)moral scientist? Measurement and framing effects shape the association between scientists and immorality.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent work points to the heterogeneous nature of science skepticism. However, most research on science skepticism has been conducted in the United States. The current work addresses the generalizability of the knowledge acquired so far by investigating individuals from a Western European country (The Netherlands). Results indicate that various previously reported findings hold up: Mirroring North American patterns, climate change skepticism is associated with political conservatism (but only modestly), and scientific literacy does not contribute to skepticism, except about genetic modification (Study 1 only) and vaccine skepticism (Study 2 only). Results also reveal a crucial difference: Religiosity does not consistently contribute to science skepticism, except about evolution. Instead, spirituality is found to most consistently predict vaccine skepticism and low general faith in science-which in turn predicts willingness to support science. Concerns about societal impact play an additional role. These findings speak to the generalizability of previous findings, improving our understanding of science skepticism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.