1. Watch in slide show mode to observe (modest) animation.
comments questions:
papers, etc:

2.
Science Comprehension without Curiosity Is No Virtue, and Curiosity without Comprehension No Vice
Dan M. Kahan
Yale University
& many x 103 others
Research Supported by:
National Science Foundation, SES
Annenberg Public Policy Center

3. What am I talking about? ... Two (principal) studies, two dynamics:
MS2R (motivated system 2 reasoning) Science curiosity
Ground rules:
Presentation punctuated by identified (identified) comment/question interludes

4. What am I talking about? ... Two (principal) studies, two dynamics:
1. MS2R (motivated system 2 reasoning) Science curiosity
Ground rules:
Presentation punctuated by identified (identified) comment/question interludes

5. What am I talking about? ... Two (principal) studies, two dynamics:
1. MS2R (motivated system 2 reasoning) Science curiosity
Ground rules:
Presentation punctuated by identified (identified) comment/question interludes

6. What am I talking about? ... Two (principal) studies, two dynamics:
1. MS2R (motivated system 2 reasoning) Science curiosity
Ground rules:
Presentation punctuated by identified (identified) comment/question interludes

7. What am I talking about? ... Two (principal) studies, two dynamics:
1. MS2R (motivated system 2 reasoning) Science curiosity
Ground rules:
Presentation punctuated by identified (identified) comment/question interludes

8. What am I talking about? ... Two (principal) studies, two dynamics:
1. MS2R (motivated system 2 reasoning) Science curiosity
Ground rules:
Presentation punctuated by identified comment/question interludes

9. What am I talking about? ... Two (principal) studies, two dynamics:
1. MS2R (motivated system 2 reasoning) Science curiosity
Ground rules:
Presentation punctuated by identified comment/question interludes

10. Comment/question interlude!

12. “Skin cream experiment”

13. “Skin cream experiment”

14. “Gun ban experiment”

15. Four conditions

16. Comment/question interlude!

17. Correct interpretation of data
skin treatment
Numeracy score
Gun ban
Numeracy score

18. Covariance & Numeracy
Derived via logistic regression. Bars denote 0.95 CIs.

19. Correct interpretation of data
skin treatment
Numeracy score
Gun ban
Numeracy score

20. Correct interpretation of data
Liberal Democrats (< 0 on Conservrepub)
Conserve Republicans (> 0 on Conservrepub)
skin treatment
Numeracy score
Gun ban
Numeracy score

21. Correct interpretation of data
Liberal Democrats (< 0 on Conservrepub)
Conserve Republicans (> 0 on Conservrepub)
skin treatment
Numeracy score
Gun ban
Numeracy score

22. Best fitting regression model for experiment results
rash_decrease
0.40
(1.57)
rash increase
0.06
(0.22)
crime increase
1.07
(4.02)
z_numeracy
-0.01
(-0.05)
z_numeracy_x_rash_decrease
0.55
(2.29)
z_numeracy_x_rash_increase
0.23
(1.05)
z_numeracy_x_crime_increase
0.46
(2.01)
z_numeracy2
0.31
(2.46)
z_numeracy2_x_rash_decrease
0.02
(0.14)
z_numeracy2_x_rash_increase
-0.07
(-0.39)
z_numeracy2_x_crime_increase
-0.31
(-1.75)
Conserv_Repub
-0.64
(-3.95)
Conserv_Repub_x_rash_decrease
0.56
(2.64)
Conserv_Repub_x_rash_increase
1.28
(6.02)
Conserv_Repub_x_crime_increase
0.63
(2.82)
z_numeracy_x_Conserv_repub
-0.33
(-1.89)
z_nuneracy_x_Conserv_Repub_x_rash_decrease
0.33
(1.40)
z_nuneracy_x__crime_increase
0.54
(2.17)
z_nuneracy_x__x_rash_increase
0.26
(1.08)
_constant
-0.96
(-4.70)
N = Outcome variable is “Correct” (0 = incorrect interpretation of data, 1 = correct interpretation). Predictor estimates are logit coefficients with z-test statistic indicated parenthetically. Experimental assignment predictors—rash_decrease, rash_increase, and crime_increase—are dummy variables (0 = unassigned, 1 = assigned—with assignment to “crime decreases” as the comparison condition. Z_numeracy and Conserv_Repub are centered at 0 for ease of interpretation. Bolded typeface indicates predictor coefficient is significant at p < 0.05.

23. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
rash increases
skin treatment
rash increases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
crime increases
80%
90%
100%
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

24. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
rash increases
25%, ± 10
skin treatment
rash increases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
crime increases
80%
90%
100%
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

25. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
rash increases
rash increases
rash decreases
skin treatment
rash increases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
crime increases
80%
90%
100%
crime decreases
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

26. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
5%, ± 6
rash increases
rash increases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decrease
rash decreases
rash increases
rash increases
skin treatment 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
crime increases
80%
90%
100%
crime decreases
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

27. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
rash increases
rash increases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash increases
rash increases
skin treatment 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
crime increases
80%
90%
100%
crime decreases
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

28. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
rash increases
rash increases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash increases
rash increases
skin treatment 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
crime increases
80%
90%
100%
crime decreases
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

29. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
rash increases
rash increases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash increases
rash increases
skin treatment 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
crime increases
80%
90%
100%
crime decreases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

30. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
rash increases
rash increases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash increases
rash increases
skin treatment 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
crime increases
80%
90%
100%
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

31. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
rash increases
rash increases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash decreases
rash increases
rash increases
skin treatment 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
crime increases
80%
90%
100%
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

32. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Avg. “polarization”
on crime data
for low numeracy
partisans
25% (± 9%)
Avg. “polarization”
on crime data
for high numeracy
partisans
46% (± 17%)
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

33. Comment/question interlude!

34. Bounded rationality thesis (BRT)

35. Cultural cognition and Dual Process Reasoning Observational studies

36. conservrepub below avg conservrepub above avg
How much risk do you believe global warming poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”
BRT prediction
Reality
Extreme
conservrepub below avg
sample mean
conservrepub above avg
no risk

37. conservrepub below avg conservrepub above avg
How much risk do you believe global warming poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”
BRT prediction
Reality
Extreme
conservrepub below avg
sample mean
conservrepub above avg
no risk

38. conservrepub below avg Conservative Republican conservrepub above avg
How much risk do you believe global warming poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”
BRT prediction
Reality
Extreme
Liberal Democrat
conservrepub below avg
sample mean
sample mean
Conservative Republican
conservrepub above avg
no risk
Ordinary science intelligence 1.0
N = Adapted from Kahan, Peters et al., Nature Climate Change, 2, (2012). Shaded area denotes 95% Cis.

39. conservrepub below avg Conservative Republican conservrepub above avg
How much risk do you believe global warming poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”
BRT prediction
Reality
Extreme
Liberal Democrat
conservrepub below avg
sample mean
Conservative Republican
conservrepub above avg
no risk
Ordinary science intelligence 1.0
N = Adapted from Kahan, Peters et al., Nature Climate Change, 2, (2012). Shaded area denotes 95% Cis.

40. Conservative Republican
There is “solid evidence” of recent global warming due “mostly” to “human activity such as burning fossil fuels.” [agree, disagree]
Liberal Democrat
Probability of “agree”
Conservative Republican
Ordinary Science Intelligence 2.0 (z-score)
N = shaded areas denote 0.95 CIs.

41. Conservative Republican
There is “solid evidence” of recent global warming due “mostly” to “human activity such as burning fossil fuels.” [agree, disagree]
Liberal Democrat
Probability of “agree”
Conservative Republican
Actively Open-minded Thinking (z-score)
N= 750. Derived from logistic regression. Colored bars denote 0.95 CIs.

42. Conservative Republican
There is “solid evidence” of recent global warming due “mostly” to “human activity such as burning fossil fuels.” [agree, disagree]
Liberal Democrat
Probability of “agree”
Conservative Republican
Cognitive Reflection Test (no. correct)
N = Brackets denote 0.95 CIs.

43. N = 1759. Shaded area denote 0.95 CIs.

44. N = 1759. Shaded area denote 0.95 CIs.

45. Monte carlo simulations
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)
high numeracy = 7 correct
low numeracy = 3 correct
Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Avg. “polarization”
on crime data
for low numeracy
partisans
25% (± 9%)
Avg. “polarization”
on crime data
for high numeracy
partisans
46% (± 17%)
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
crime decreases
Gun ban
crime increases
crime increases
crime decreases 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
probabilility of correct interpretation of data
probabilility of correct interpretation of data

46. Motivated System 2 Reasoning (MS2R)

47. Bounded rationality thesis (BRT)

48. the problem with MS2R . . .

49. not too little rationality . . .

50. not too little rationality . . . but too much

51. tragedy of the science communications commons

52. Comment/question interlude!

53. What am I talking about? ... Two (principal) studies, two dynamics:
1. MS2R (motivated system 2 reasoning) Science curiosity
Ground rules:
Presentation punctuated by identified comment/question interludes

55. The science of science filmmaking

56. State of the art “Science Curiosity” measure
Test of Science Related Attitudes (TOSRA)
I am curious about the world in which we live
I find it boring to hear about new ideas
I would enjoy visiting a science museum at the weekend
I would like to be given a science book as a present
I get bored when watching science programs on TV

57. Performance measure

58. “Science Curiosity Scale” (SCS_1.0 ) A little but not closely
(IRT graded response) .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1
probability of pro-curiosity response -3 -2 -1 2 3
science curiosity
read book on “scientific research or discoveries” in last yr
Read science book in last yr
BSCIENCE
how closely follow news on “scientific research or discoveries”
Not at all
very closely
A little but not closely
closely
Science Curiosity Scale
Science Curiosity Scale

59. Mass Extinction: Life at the Brink
Darwin’s Dangerous Idea
Your Inner Fish

60. Engagement Index (z-score)
Mass Extinction
Engagement Index (z-score)
Darwin’s Dangerous Idea
Your Inner Fish
Science curiosity scale (percentile)
Bars denote 0.95 level of confidence

61. Mass Extinction: Life at the Brink
Darwin’s Dangerous Idea
Your Inner Fish
Daily Hollywood Rundown

62. Engagement Index (z-score)
Mass Extinction
Engagement Index (z-score)
Darwin’s Dangerous Idea
Your Inner Fish
Science curiosity scale (percentile)
Bars denote 0.95 level of confidence

63. Engagement Index (z-score)
Mass Extinction
Engagement Index (z-score)
Darwin’s Dangerous Idea
Your Inner Fish
Daily Hollywood Rundown
Science curiosity scale (percentile)
Bars denote 0.95 level of confidence

64. Comment/question interlude!

65. Political polarization . . . .

66. Q. Are “curious” partisans more likely to examine surprising contrary evidence?

67. Q. Are “curious” partisans more likely to examine surprising contrary evidence?
1. Believer unsurprising vs. skeptical surprising
2. Believer surprising vs. skeptical unsurprising

68. Probability of selecting surprising skeptic vs
Probability of selecting surprising skeptic vs. unsurprising believer story
.25 .5
.75 1
N = 733. Based on logistic regression model & monte carlo simulation.

69. below avg. science curiosity
Probability of selecting surprising skeptic vs. unsurprising believer story
Liberal Dem.
below avg. science curiosity
N = 733. Based on logistic regression model & monte carlo simulation.

70. below avg. science curiosity
Probability of selecting surprising skeptic vs. unsurprising believer story
24% (10%, 45%)
Liberal Dem.
below avg. science curiosity
N = 733. Based on logistic regression model & monte carlo simulation.

71. above avg. science curiosity below avg. science curiosity
Probability of selecting surprising skeptic vs. unsurprising believer story
24% (10%, 45%)
68% (46%, 85%)
Liberal Dem.
above avg. science curiosity
Liberal Dem.
below avg. science curiosity
N = 733. Based on logistic regression model & monte carlo simulation.

72. above avg. science curiosity below avg. science curiosity
Probability of selecting surprising skeptic vs. unsurprising believer story
45% (± 31%)
Liberal Dem.
above avg. science curiosity
Liberal Dem.
below avg. science curiosity
N = 733. Based on logistic regression model & monte carlo simulation.

73. below avg. science curiosity above avg. science curiosity
Probability of selecting surprising believer vs. unsurprising skeptic story
20% (± 19%)
Conserv. Repub.
below avg. science curiosity
Conserv. Repub.
above avg. science curiosity
N = 733. Based on logistic regression model & monte carlo simulation.

74. Comment/question finale!

75. www. culturalcognition.net
“I am you!” 75

76. Testing BRT:
Experimental studies

77. Testing BRT:
Experimental studies

78. Testing BRT:
Experimental studies

79. problem test I just took supplies good evidence of how reflective and 1 2 3 4 5 6
-1.6 -1
1.6
strongly agree
moderately agree
slightly agree
slightly disagree
moderately disagree
strongly disagree
Very liberal
Strong Democrat
Very Conservative
Strong Republican
Liberal
Democrat
Conservative
Republican
Moderate
Independent
Conserv_repub “I
think the word -
problem test I just took
supplies good
evidence of how reflective and
open
minded someone is .”

80. problem test I just took supplies good evidence of how reflective and 1 2 3 4 5 6
-1.6 -1
1.6
strongly agree
moderately agree
slightly agree
slightly disagree
moderately disagree
strongly disagree
Very liberal
Strong Democrat
Very Conservative
Strong Republican
Liberal
Democrat
Conservative
Republican
Moderate
Independent
Conserv_repub “I
think the word -
problem test I just took
supplies good
evidence of how reflective and
open
minded someone is .”
control

81. problem test I just took supplies good evidence of how reflective and 1 2 3 4 5 6
-1.6 -1
1.6
strongly agree
moderately agree
slightly agree
slightly disagree
moderately disagree
strongly disagree
Very liberal
Strong Democrat
Very Conservative
Strong Republican
Liberal
Democrat
Conservative
Republican
Moderate
Independent
Conserv_repub “I
think the word -
problem test I just took
supplies good
evidence of how reflective and
open
minded someone is .”
“skeptics score higher”
control

82. problem test I just took supplies good evidence of how reflective and 1 2 3 4 5 6
-1.6 -1
1.6
strongly agree
moderately agree
slightly agree
slightly disagree
moderately disagree
strongly disagree
Very liberal
Strong Democrat
Very Conservative
Strong Republican
Liberal
Democrat
Conservative
Republican
Moderate
Independent
Conserv_repub “I
think the word -
problem test I just took
supplies good
evidence of how reflective and
open
minded someone is .”
“believers score higher”
“skeptics score higher”
control

83. CRT = 0.65 “I think the word - problem test I just took supplies good1 2 3 4 5 6
-1.6 -1
1.6
strongly agree
moderately agree
slightly agree
slightly disagree
moderately disagree
strongly disagree
Very liberal
Strong Democrat
Very Conservative
Strong Republican
Liberal
Democrat
Conservative
Republican
Moderate
Independent
Conserv_repub “I
think the word -
problem test I just took
supplies good
evidence of how reflective and
open
minded someone is .”
“believers score higher”
“skeptics score higher”
control
CRT = 0.65

84. “skeptics score higher”
control
“believers score higher”
CRT = 1

85. “skeptics score higher”
control
“believers score higher”
CRT > 1

88. Correct interpretation of data
rash decreases
rash increases
incorrect
Numeracy score
Lowess regression line.

89. Covariance & Numeracy
Derived via logistic regression. Bars denote 0.95 CIs.