There isn’t a single, simple explanation for why some conservative Americans express skepticism toward certain scientific findings; instead, a mix of cultural, political, and communication factors contribute.

Cultural Cognition: Research in cultural cognition suggests that people tend to interpret information in a way that reinforces their pre-existing beliefs and group identities. For some conservatives, certain scientific findings are seen as challenging established cultural values or traditions (such as those related to religion, national identity, or free-market principles).

Identity Protection: When scientific claims appear to support policy measures that could disrupt economic interests (for instance, regulations aimed at reducing carbon emissions), they can trigger an identity-protective response. In this light, rejecting the scientific consensus becomes a way to uphold one’s social and political identity.

Association with Political Elites: In some cases, prominent scientists and scientific institutions have been perceived as aligned with political or liberal agendas. When scientific conclusions seem to be drawn primarily from or used to promote certain policy positions (for example, aggressive climate action), conservative audiences may see them as politicized rather than objective.

Distrust of “Elites”: There is also a broader skepticism toward institutions seen as part of the societal elite—including universities and government research bodies. This mistrust can be amplified by media sources and opinion leaders who frame such institutions as disconnected from the “real world” or as pursuing a political agenda.

Partisan Media: Research has shown that media outlets catering to conservative audiences sometimes present scientific issues in a way that emphasizes uncertainty, controversy, or ideological conflict. This framing can reinforce skepticism or encourage selective exposure to information that confirms existing views.

Echo Chambers: The use of social media and selective media consumption can create echo chambers, where individuals are more frequently exposed to narratives that question or dismiss widely accepted scientific findings, rather than the full range of scientific evidence.

Economic Impacts: Some scientific conclusions, such as those related to environmental impacts or energy production, imply the need for policy shifts that might affect industries where conservatives have strong economic or political ties. This can lead to a defensive posture toward science that appears to threaten established economic structures.

Policy Implications: When scientific research becomes a basis for regulatory proposals that are seen as restricting economic freedom, conservatives may be more inclined to question the objectivity of the science or the motives behind it.

Conclusion

The skepticism toward some scientific claims among segments of conservative Americans is not a blanket rejection of science as a whole but rather a response to specific scientific conclusions that are perceived to conflict with cultural values, economic interests, or political ideologies. This dynamic is reinforced by how scientific issues are communicated through politicized media and the broader social context in which individuals form their beliefs.