The use of online surveys has grown rapidly in social science and policy research, surpassing more established methods. We argue that a better understanding is needed, especially of the strengths and weaknesses of non‐probability online surveys, which can be conducted relatively quickly and cheaply. We describe two common approaches to non‐probability online surveys—river and panel sampling—and theorize their inherent selection biases: namely, topical self‐selection and economic self‐selection. We conduct an empirical comparison of two river samples (Facebook and web‐based sample) and one panel sample (from a major survey research company) with benchmark data grounded in a comprehensive population registry. The river samples diverge from the benchmark on demographic variables and yield much higher frequencies on non‐demographic variables, even after demographic adjustments; we attribute this to topical self‐selection. The panel sample is closer to the benchmark. When examining the characteristics of a non‐demographic subpopulation, we detect no differences between the river and panel samples. We conclude that non‐probability online surveys do not replace probability surveys, but augment the researcher's toolkit with new digital practices, such as exploratory studies of small and emerging non‐demographic subpopulations.

Science is crucial for evidence-based decision-making. Public trust in scientists can help decision makers act on the basis of the best available evidence, especially during crises. However, in recent years the epistemic authority of science has been challenged, causing concerns about low public trust in scientists. We interrogated these concerns with a preregistered 68-country survey of 71,922 respondents and found that in most countries, most people trust scientists and agree that scientists should engage more in society and policymaking. We found variations between and within countries, which we explain with individual- and country-level variables, including political orientation. While there is no widespread lack of trust in scientists, we cannot discount the concern that lack of trust in scientists by even a small minority may affect considerations of scientific evidence in policymaking. These findings have implications for scientists and policymakers seeking to maintain and increase trust in scientists.

There is a considerable amount of hate material online, but the degree to which individuals are exposed to these materials vary. Using samples of youth and young adults from four countries, we investigate who is exposed to hate materials. We find support for using routine activity theory to understand exposure at the individual level; however, there is significant cross-national variation in exposure after accounting for individual-level factors. We consider two plausible hypotheses that could account for this cross-national variation. The data best fit the hypothesis that anti–hate speech laws may provide a source of guardianship against exposure.

This paper examines cross-national commonalities and differences in online hate speech content, exposure, and emotional reaction. Using online surveys from 18 to 25-year-old respondents in six countries, we find a majority of respondents were exposed to online hate in the preceding 3 months. Commonalities across countries are the platform where the respondents were exposed and how they arrived at such content. Unique national cultures of hate speech also exist, including the common targets and respondents’ emotional reactions. A majority of respondents report feeling angry, sad, or ashamed, but most worrisome may be the substantial numbers who report feelings of hatred or pride after seeing online hate. Given the potential for repeated exposure and the recent increase in hate crimes in the US. and Europe, this finding should serve as a reminder of the dangers of online hate and its potential link to offline violence.