Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Feb 9;15(1):4819.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-89065-2.

Integrating regression and multiobjective optimization techniques to analyze scientific perception

Sandra González-Gallardo  1 , María Isabel Sánchez-Rodríguez  2 , Ana B Ruiz  1 , Mariano Luque  1
Affiliations

Integrating regression and multiobjective optimization techniques to analyze scientific perception

Sandra González-Gallardo et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Science holds high prestige in society and understanding public perception of what is considered scientific is essential. The scientificity of a profession is the degree of scientific legitimacy and is determined by the quality of its scientific procedures. Higher levels of scientificity are achieved when scientific results are more objective, impartial, and neutral. In this work, we first estimate the scientificity levels attributed to various professions using a logistic regression model. Then, we explore ways to simultaneously improve their scientific perception by means of multiobjective optimization techniques. To this aim, the statistical results are used to formulate a multiobjective optimization model that maximizes the scientific perception of all the professions considered. The findings provide insights into science policy measures to optimize resource allocation in order to increase the scientific perception of the professions.

Keywords: Logistic regression; Multiple criteria decision making; Science policy; Scientific perception.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

References

    1. Fernández-Esquinas, M., Cárdenas, J. & Sánchez-Rodríguez, M.I. El estatus científico de profesiones y prácticas: Una comparación entre ciencias experimentales, ciencias sociales y pseudociencias. In FECYT (ed.), Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2018, Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología, Madrid, pp. 107-139 (2019).
    1. Nisbet, M. C. et al. Knowledge, reservations, or promise?: A media effects model for public perceptions of science and technology. Commun. Res.29(5), 584–608 (2002).
    1. Bauer, M. W., Petkova, K. & Boyadjieva, P. Public knowledge of and attitudes to science: Alternative measures that may end the “science war’’. Sci. Technol. Human Values25(1), 30–51 (2000).
    1. Myers, T. A. et al. Predictors of trust in the general science and climate science research of US federal agencies. Public Underst. Sci.26(7), 843–860 (2017). - PubMed
    1. Lilienfeld, S.O. Public skepticism of psychology. Why many people perceive the study of human behavior as unscientific. American Psychologist 67, 2, 119-129. (2012) - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources