Science Barometer 2018

Resource Type
Dataset : Survey and aggregate data
  • Wissenschaft im Dialog
Publication Date
  • Weißkopf, Markus (Wissenschaft im Dialog, Berlin) (Researcher)
  • Ziegler, Ricarda (Wissenschaft im Dialog, Berlin) (Researcher)
  • Kremer, Bastian (Wissenschaft im Dialog, Berlin) (Researcher)
  • Kantar EMNID, Bielefeld (Data Collector)
  • ZA:
    • Society, Culture
    • University, Research, the Sciences
    • Communication, Public Opinion, Media
  • CESSDA Topic Classification:
    • Society and culture
    • Cultural activities and participation
    • Information and communication
    • Science and technology
  • Abstract

    Since 2014, Wissenschaft im Dialog has been using the science barometer to collect population-representative data on the attitudes of German citizens towards science and research on an annual basis. The aim is to contribute to a fact-based discourse on the relationship between science and the public and targeted science communication by collecting, processing and communicating the results. The questionnaire of the science barometer contains corresponding questions on cognitive attitudes such as interest and information and the respondents´ information behaviour on topics from science and research. In addition, evaluative attitudes will be collected on issues such as trust, the assessment of the benefits and risks of science and the social role of research. The questions are aimed at general attitudes towards science and research. In individual cases, questions are also devoted to specific research areas or technologies or, alternately, to current developments in science and the public. The science barometers 2014 to 2016 were sponsored by the Philip Morris Foundation, the science barometers 2017 to 2019 by the Robert Bosch Foundation. Topics: 1. Interest, information behaviour and being informed about science and research: interest in politics, sport, economics and finance as well as miscellaneous topics such as celebrities or human fates; frequency of dealing with science in selected contexts (conversations with friends and family, attending events, reading articles on scientific topics in print media, television programmes, radio programmes and on the Internet); sources of information on the Internet about science and research (e.g. social networks, blogs or online forums, Wikipedia, etc.); frequency of selected activities in social networks; visits to institutions or events related to science in the last twelve months (e.g. science museum, zoo or aquarium): personal reasons for engaging in science and research; agreement with statements on science and research (too complicated and therefore incomprehensible, no personal relevance due to lack of relevance to everyday life, knowledge transfer in school, difficult assessment of contradictory information, controversies between scientists as a helpful contribution to correct research results); 2. Trust in science and research: general trust in science and research; reasons for trust in scientists (expertise, working according to rules and standards, research in the public interest); reasons for distrust of scientists (frequent mistakes, adapting results to one´s own expectations, dependence on donors); donors for science and research (open). 3. Evaluation of the benefits and risks of science for society: attitude to science and research (lead to a better life in the future, to rapid changes in living conditions through science and research, should be allowed to explore everything without restriction, scientists work for the benefit of society, personally important to know about science and research, influencing one´s own life through new developments whether intentional or not, personal decision about use or non-use of new developments); Opinion on unscientific statements (climate change is mainly caused by humans and their actions, vaccinating children harms more than it benefits, humans and animals have common ancestors from which they evolved in the course of evolution). 4. Relationship between science and politics: extent to which business influences science. 5. Concrete concepts of science and research: skills or characteristics of a good scientist; perception of the replication crisis in the media; assessment of the replication crisis. 6. Personal relation to science and research: job in science and research; personal acquaintance with a scientist. Demography: sex; age; education; occupation; household size; net household income; party preference; religiosity; migration background. Additionally coded was: interview ID; interview duration (in seconds); Sample (mobile, landline); weight; city size (BIK); federal state; region.
Temporal Coverage
  • 2018-08-06 / 2018-08-13
Geographic Coverage
  • Germany (DE)
Sampled Universe
German-speaking resident population aged 14 and over in private households
Probability: Multistage; Sampling Procedure Comment: Probability Sample: Multistage Sample
Time Dimension
  • Cross-section
Collection Mode
  • Telephone interview: CATI
  • Telephone interview: CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone Interview)
Data and File Information
  • Number of Variables: 112
C - Data and documents are only released for academic research and teaching after the data depositor’s written authorization. For this purpose the Data Archive obtains a written permission with specification of the user and the analysis intention.
All metadata from GESIS DBK are available free of restriction under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. However, GESIS requests that you actively acknowledge and give attribution to all metadata sources, such as the data providers and any data aggregators, including GESIS. For further information see
Alternative Identifiers
  • ZA6965 (Type: ZA-No.)
  • Wissenschaft im Dialog (Hrsg.): Wissenschaftsbarometer 2018 – Ergebnisse der jährlichen bevölkerungsrepräsentativen Umfrage zu Wissenschaft und Forschung in Deutschland. Berlin 2018 abrufbar unter:

Update Metadata: 2021-04-07 | Issue Number: 21 | Registration Date: 2019-02-19