Scholarlink

<p>Science and politics function as distinct yet structurally interconnected social systems, creating a&#xa0;delicate need to balance expertise and democratic representation. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed tensions in this relationship, with initial public support for containment measures giving way to growing skepticism. This paper explores two distinct perspectives on this development: (1)&#xa0;the <i>technocratic overreach</i> perspective, which attributes low support to perceptions that experts overstepped their role in political decision-making; and (2)&#xa0;the <i>blame-deflection</i> perspective, which links it to the perception that politicians strategically used appeals to scientific authority to shield themselves from criticism. Using survey data from the Austrian Corona Panel Project, we test hypotheses derived from these contrasting perspectives to better understand public concerns surrounding the boundary between science and politics during the pandemic. Our findings show that both technocratic overreach and blame deflection perceptions are associated with lower support for mitigation measures, but the patterns of underlying attitudes differ. Perceptions of technocratic overreach were associated with low trust in science, but overall levels of trust in science remained high and stable, suggesting that overreach perceptions stemmed primarily from pre-existing skepticism toward science rather than concerns about technocratic policy-making during the pandemic. In contrast, perceptions of blame deflection were related to low trust in government, which strongly declined during the pandemic. Overall, the study identifies crisis management as a&#xa0;key area where a&#xa0;clearer demarcation between science and politics is needed.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Perceptions of science and politics during the COVID-19 pandemic in Austria: technocratic overreach or blame deflection?

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月4日

查看全文
  • Julia Partheymüller,
  • Jakob-Moritz Eberl,
  • Alexander Bogner

摘要

Science and politics function as distinct yet structurally interconnected social systems, creating a delicate need to balance expertise and democratic representation. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed tensions in this relationship, with initial public support for containment measures giving way to growing skepticism. This paper explores two distinct perspectives on this development: (1) the technocratic overreach perspective, which attributes low support to perceptions that experts overstepped their role in political decision-making; and (2) the blame-deflection perspective, which links it to the perception that politicians strategically used appeals to scientific authority to shield themselves from criticism. Using survey data from the Austrian Corona Panel Project, we test hypotheses derived from these contrasting perspectives to better understand public concerns surrounding the boundary between science and politics during the pandemic. Our findings show that both technocratic overreach and blame deflection perceptions are associated with lower support for mitigation measures, but the patterns of underlying attitudes differ. Perceptions of technocratic overreach were associated with low trust in science, but overall levels of trust in science remained high and stable, suggesting that overreach perceptions stemmed primarily from pre-existing skepticism toward science rather than concerns about technocratic policy-making during the pandemic. In contrast, perceptions of blame deflection were related to low trust in government, which strongly declined during the pandemic. Overall, the study identifies crisis management as a key area where a clearer demarcation between science and politics is needed.