About
About CHIP50
Learn about the project →
People
Meet the consortium →
Learning
Hands-on training→
Survey Methodology
View the methods→
Submit Proposals
How to submit
Learn about the submission process →
Capabilities
Goals, methodology, and proposal types →
Review process
After your proposal is submitted→
After acceptance
What to do if your proposal is accepted→
Selected proposals
View the selected successful proposals→
Social Network Competition
Special competition for social network questions→
Publications
Reports
Read all of our reports →
Publications
Read selected project papers →
Topics
Children and Youth
Explore this topic →
Economic Impact
Explore this topic →
Election
Explore this topic →
Executive Approval
Explore this topic →
Health Behavior
Explore this topic →
Mental Health
Explore this topic →
Misinformation
Explore this topic →
Policy Preferences
Explore this topic →
Schools
Explore this topic →
Testing
Explore this topic →
Vaccination
Explore this topic →
Other
Explore this topic →
Browse by Tag →
Data
Trust in Institutions
View the tracker→
Vaccination Rates
View the tracker→
Views on Abortion
View the tracker→
Executive Approval
View the tracker→
Social Media Demographics
View the tracker→
Archived Data
View →
Media Coverage
News articles
View selected media coverage →
Journalist resources
Inquiries →
InsightsKnight Partnership
Donate
Home
Submit Proposals
How to submit
Learn about the submission process →
Capabilities
Goals, methodology, and proposal types →
Review process
After your proposal is  submitted →
After acceptance
What to do if your proposal is accepted →
Social Network Competition
Special competition for social network questions →
About
About COVID States
Learn about the project →
People
Meet the consortium →
Learning
Hands on training→
Survey Methodology
View the methods →
Publications
Reports
Read all of our reports →
Publications
Read selected project papers →
Topics
Children and Youth
Explore this topic →
Economic Impact
Explore this topic →
Election
Explore this topic →
Executive Approval
Explore this topic →
Health Behavior
Explore this topic →
Mental Health
Explore this topic →
Misinformation
Explore this topic →
Policy Preferences
Explore this topic →
Schools
Explore this topic →
Testing
Explore this topic →
Vaccination
Explore this topic →
Other
Explore this topic →
Data
Trust in Institutions
View the tracker→
Vaccination Rates
View the tracker→
Views on Abortion
View the tracker→
Executive Approval
View the tracker→
Social Media Demographics
View the tracker→
Archived Data
View →
Media Coverage
News articles
View selected news coverage →
Journalist resources
Inquiries→
Insights

Report #

115

American Attitudes Toward Government Interventions in Science

By the COVID-19 Consortium for Understanding the Public’s Policy Preferences Across States

Home
/
Publications
/
Reports
/
American Attitudes Toward Government Interventions in Science

Key takeaways

● Americans who disapprove of the administration’s science-related policies outnumber those who approve by more than two to one. On average, 48% disapprove or strongly disapprove of recent government actions in that space, while only 21% approve or strongly approve.

● The most negatively viewed actions are the pause in public health information dissemination (51% disapproval) and the firing of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) employees (50% disapproval).

● Approval levels for individual actions are low;only the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) (29%) and the layoffs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (27%) received more than 25% approval.

● Average approval of science-related government actions is highest among Republicans (42%), men (28%), graduate degree holders (30%), and high-income respondents (31%). Disapproval is strongest among Democrats (74%), African Americans (56%), women (53%), and those aged 65 and older (55%).

● A majority of Americans support greater government investment in research: 57% favor increased medical research funding and 42% support increased scientific research funding. Relatively few want funding cuts: only 10% for medical research and 16% for science.

● Even among Republicans, nearly half (48%) favor more medical research funding, though only 31% support increases in science research funding. A quarter of Republicans support cuts for scientific research and 15% for medical research.

● While support for research remains strong, the proportion of Americans reporting high trust in scientists declined from 58% in2020 to 36% in 2025, with sharper drops among Republicans (from 54% to 26%) than among Democrats (from 67% to 50%).

● Despite declines in public confidence, scientists and doctors remain more trusted than most institutions, including Congress, the Supreme Court, and the news media.

‍

Featured media Coverage

No items found.

Tags

CDC
Science



Report details

Published:
June
2025
Report Number:
115
Topic:
Policy Preferences
OSF Preprint:
View  
Download report   

Related Reports

Report #
93
November
2022
Most Important Problems Facing the US Before the 2022 Midterm Election
Policy Preferences

Report #
80
January
2022
Americans' views on violence against the government
Policy Preferences

Report #
32
January
2021
Update on public support for COVID-19 measures
Policy Preferences

Report #
28
December
2020
Public support for COVID-19 measures in Massachusetts
Policy Preferences

Join our mailing list to receive updates about new reports, findings, and datasets!
Join Mailing List
A multi-university collaboration
About
About CHIP50
People
Learning
Insights
Survey Methodology
proposals
How to submit
Capabilities
Review process
After acceptance
Publications
Reports
Journal Publications
Topics
Children and Youth
Economic Impact
Election
Executive Approval
Health Behavior
Mental Health
Misinformation
Policy Preferences
Schools
Testing
Vaccination
Other
Data
Behaviors during COVID
COVID-19 Tweets
Trust in Institutions
Vaccination Rates
Views on Abortion
Media
News articles
Journalist resources

Contact us
© 2024 The Civic Health  and Institutions Project