Publisher's Synopsis
This is a study of the association between scientific literacy and individual opinions on military spending of voting-age Americans using data from the 2016 General Social Survey. Based on responses to general science knowledge questions, I created a scientific knowledge test. Individuals were coded as scientifically literate if they answered 10 questions correctly out of the 12 on this test. Using multinomial logistic regression models, I found those exhibiting scientific literacy were 1.88 times more likely to express the opinion that military spending is too high, as compared to individuals classified as not scientifically literate. My results were robust to changes in the passing threshold for the test. Given the growing role of science and technology in the military, further study of this issue may have considerable implications for the education, scientific, and government communities. The findings could be applied to arguments related to the establishment of voter qualifications, changes in funding to science education, or how government agencies convey their spending habits to the public.This compilation includes a reproduction of the 2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community.The implications of this connection between scientific literacy and opinions and voting habits could have significant impacts across government, education, and scientific fields. The results could be applied to arguments for or against the establishment of voter qualifications, changes in funding to science education, or how government agencies convey their spending habits to the public. The concept of scientific literacy dates back to the 1950s with the advent of nuclear power, and the growing concern for environmental protection. With these public concerns, voters were faced with forming opinions and making decisions that required some level of scientific understanding. As stated by researcher Jon Miller, "in a democratic society the level of scientific literacy in the population has important implications for science policy decisions". In the 1960s, voters were often asked to vote on laws and regulations involving scientific concepts, such as nuclear power. As more science-based issues appeared on state referenda, there was "apprehension in the scientific community about the public's ability to understand the issues and to make an informed judgement." Miller concluded that "the level of scientific literacy in the United States is deplorably low" and corrective actions "will improve the quality of both our science and technology and our political life."
