More religion means less science:An International comparison of the relations between religious beliefs and levels of and attitudes to scientific knowledge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette recherche présente les résultats d’une analyse comparative des liens entre pratiques, croyances religieuses et niveau de connaissances scientifiques. À partir d’analyses secondaires de données de sondages dans l’Union européenne (Eurobaromètres de 2005 et 2010) et aux États-Unis (Pew Research Center 2018), nous montrons, d’une part, que quel que soit le pays considéré, plus les individus s’identifient à une religion et la pratiquent fortement, moins ils ont de compétence scientifique. D’autre part, c’est l’ensemble des représentations des sciences qui est affecté par l’univers religieux des individus. Plus les individus adhèrent à une religion, moins ils ont des attitudes positives envers les sciences. Les Européens et les Américains les moins religieux sont ceux dont les représentations des sciences et de leurs répercussions sociales sont les plus positives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".