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.

This research examined public opinion toward genetically modified plants and animals for food, and how trust in organizations and media coverage explained attitudes toward these organisms. Nationally representative samples (N = 8821) over 10 years showed Australians were less positive toward genetically modified animals compared to genetically modified plants for food, especially in years where media coverage was high. Structural equation modeling found that positive attitudes toward different genetically modified organisms for food were significantly associated with higher trust in scientists and regulators (e.g. governments), and with lower trust in watchdogs (e.g. environmental movement). Public trust in scientists and watchdogs was a stronger predictor of attitudes toward the use of genetically modified plants for food than animals, but only when media coverage was low. Results are discussed regarding the moral acceptability of genetically modified organisms for food, the media’s role in shaping public opinion, and the role public trust in organizations has on attitudes toward genetically modified organisms.

Cross-sectional research suggests a small, inverse association between social media use and body satisfaction. However, less is known regarding prospective, bidirectional, or mediating effects. In line with sociocultural theory, this study used a three-wave design to examine direct and indirect effects between social media use and body satisfaction, via thin-ideal and muscular-ideal internalisation and social comparisons. Adolescents ( n = 1911; M_age = 14.27, SD = 1.08) were invited to complete three surveys over 1 year. Cross-lagged panel models indicated acceptable fit for two social media use operationalisations, with better fit statistics for the appearance-focused use rather than photo-based activities model. Despite largely no direct effects, indirect effects were found. Social comparisons mediated the relationships over time, whereby higher social media use predicted higher comparisons, which predicted lower body satisfaction. The reverse direction was also found. Gender invariance indicates that prevention aimed at reducing comparisons may be suitable for boys and girls.