Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42758686›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Beyond deficit and coexistence: Modeling the knowledge-conspiracy-mistrust configuration in public understanding of science.

Ahmet Süerdem, Svetlomir Zdravkov, Martin J Ivanov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ahmet SüerdemIstanbul Bilgi University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Svetlomir ZdravkovInstitute of Philosophy and Sociology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4610-0942
Martin J IvanovInstitute of Philosophy and Sociology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Debates about public trust in science often contrast deficit-based models, which emphasize the role of scientific knowledge, with constructivist perspectives that highlight the coexistence of multiple epistemologies. However, both approaches tend to overlook the mechanisms that link scientific knowledge, alternative epistemic orientations, and mistrust in science. To address this gap, the study applies a multilevel structural equation model within a multidimensional framework to examine conspiratorial reasoning as a key mechanism through which scientific knowledge influences science mistrust. Using cross-national survey data from Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic, the analysis also considers how this pathway is moderated by individual cognitive, motivational, and ideological traits, as well as macro-level political, cultural and economic factors. The findings reveal that conspiratorial reasoning significantly mediates the relationship between scientific knowledge and mistrust at both individual and regional levels. Moreover, the strength of these associations is conditioned by factors like informational engagement, regional value climates, and religiosity. Overall, the results suggest that scientific knowledge serves as a conditional epistemic resource, rather than a consistent buffer against mistrust in science.

Indexed as

COVID-19KnowledgePublic OpinionScienceTrustComprehensionEuropeHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID42758686
PMCPMC13588360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.