Why do members of the public disagree–sharply and persistently–about facts on which
expert scientists largely agree? We designed a study to test a distinctive explanation: the
cultural cognition of scientific consensus. The 'cultural cognition of risk'refers to the ...

Seeming public apathy over climate change is often attributed to a deficit in comprehension.
The public knows too little science, it is claimed, to understand the evidence or avoid being
misled 1. Widespread limits on technical reasoning aggravate the problem by forcing ...

Abstract: People disagree about the empirical dimensions of various public policy issues. It's
not surprising that people have different beliefs about the deterrent effect of the death
penalty, the impact of handgun ownership on crime, the significance of global warming, ...

Abstract: This paper accepts the unusual invitation to see for yourself issued by the Supreme
Court in Scott v. Harris, 127 S. Ct. 1769 (2007). Scott held that a police officer did not violate
the Fourth Amendment when he deliberately rammed his car into that of a fleeing motorist ...

Why do white men fear various risks less than women and minorities? Known as the “white-
male effect,” this pattern is well documented but poorly understood. This article proposes a
new explanation: identityprotective cognition. Putting work on the cultural theory of risk ...

Abstract How is public opinion towards nanotechnology likely to evolve? The 'familiarity
hypothesis' holds that support for nanotechnology will likely grow as awareness of it
expands. The basis of this conjecture is opinion polling, which finds that few members of ...

In a famous 1950s psychology experiment, researchers showed students from two Ivy League
colleges a film of an American football game between their schools in which officials made a
series of controversial decisions against one side. Asked to make their own assessments, ...

The effective regulation of risk poses a singular challenge to democracy. The public welfare
of democratic societies depends on their capacity to abate all manner of natural and man-
made hazardsfrom environmental catastrophe and economic collapse to domestic ...

Ought implies can. This Article investigates whether the central moral directives of liberalism
are ones citizens can--as a matter of human cognition--be expected to honor. Liberalism
obliges the state to disclaim a moral orthodoxy and instead premise legal obligation on ...

Why is the" neutrality" of Supreme Court decisionmaking a matter of persistent political
disagreement? What should be done to mitigate such conflict? Once the predominant focus
of constitutional law scholarship, efforts to answer these questions are now widely viewed ...