Skip to Main Content
StudySamplesKey Measurement Instruments
Lach et al. 2003  Four samples in the Pacific Northwest: university & federal agency scientists (N=155); managers of state & federal natural resource programs (N=167); members of public interest groups (N=119); & members of the “attentive public” (N=198) “Attitudes about Proper Roles of Scientists” Instrument 
We would like to know what you think should be the proper role of scientists in natural resource management decisions. Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statement. [5 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • Scientists should only report results and leave others to make management decisions. 
 • Scientists should report results and then interpret for others involved in management decisions. 
 • Scientists should work closely with managers and others to integrate scientific results into management decisions. 
 • Scientists should actively advocate for specific natural resource management decisions. 
 • Scientists should make decisions about natural resource management. 
Steel et al. 2004  Lach et al. (2003) samples Lach et al.’s (2003) “Attitudes about Proper Roles of Scientists” Instrument 
“Attitudes toward Positivism” Instrument 
In recent years there has been increasing debate about what makes for reliable scientific findings that can be used with confidence to make important decisions. Please take a moment to let us know how you characterize science and the scientific process by indicating your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements. [5 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • Use of the scientific method is the only certain way to determine what is true and false about the world. 
 • The advance of knowledge is a linear process driven by key experiments. 
 • Science provides objective knowledge about the world. 
 • It is possible to eliminate values and value judgments from the interpretation of scientific data. 
 • Facts describe true states of affairs about the world. 
Gray & Campbell 2009  1st International Marine Protected Areas Congress attendees from academic institutions (N=57); government agencies (N=73); nongovernment organizations (N=50); & other (N=19) Lach et al.’s (2003) “Attitudes about Proper Roles of Scientists” Instrument 
Steel et al.’s (2004) “Attitudes toward Positivism” Instrument 
Singh et al. 2014  Participants at 9 conservation- & ecology-related conferences that focused on ecology, environment, & land or natural resource management (N=508) slight adaptation of Lach et al.’s (2003) “Attitudes about Proper Roles of Scientists” Instrument (slight wording changes & an example of each role) 
Steel et al.’s (2004) “Attitudes toward Positivism” Instrument 
Reiners et al. 2013a  Non-student US members of the Ecological Society of America (N=1215) “Engagement in Advocacy Activities” Instrument 
How often do you provide financial support for an environmental cause as a private citizen? [6 response categories: “never” to “more than 12 times a year”] 
Approximately how much money do you donate to environmental causes each year? [6 response categories: “$0” to “more than $5000”] 
How important is it to you to engage in some personal environmental action each day (such as bicycling to work, recycling paper, or buying green products? [6 response categories: “not at all important” to “extremely important”] 
Approximately how often do you write letters to an editor, politician, or agency concerning an environmental cause, as a self-identified professional ecologist? [6 response categories: “never” to “more than 12 times a year”] 
How often do you speak publicly concerning an environmental cause, as a private citizen without referring to your ecological expertise? [6 response categories: “never” to “more than 12 times a year”] 
How often have you provided organizational leadership for or against an environmental cause such as prohibiting beach development? [4 response categories: “never” to “4 or more times”] 
Approximately what percentage of your scientific research is funded by an advocacy source such as The Nature Conservancy or the Electric Power Research Institute? [integer between 0 and 100] 
“Effects of Advocacy on Scientific Activity” Instrument 
An ecologist who is also an ‘environmental activist’ (i.e., is openly supportive of environmentalism and expresses beliefs that risks to the environment are real and serious) is just as likely to: [7 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • be objective. 
 • contribute to understanding nature. 
 • contribute to the betterment of society. 
 • have a long and fulfilling scientific career. 
“Attitudes toward Value-Free Objectivity in Research” Instrument 
Please indicate your level of disagreement or agreement with the following statements. [7 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • The pursuit of [basic/applied] research by ecologists is purely objective and value-free. 
 • The pursuit of [basic/applied] research by ecologists can be purely objective and value-free. 
 • The pursuit of [basic/applied] research by ecologists should be purely objective and value-free. 
Crawford et al. 2016  Ecology & biology undergraduate students (N=37), graduate students (N=77), & faculty (N=38) at the University of Georgia; science & policy professionals at state and federal government agencies (N=48); & science & policy professionals at conservation or environmental nongovernmental organizations (N=49) “Perceived Advocacy” Instrument 
Please indicate your belief about whether each activity is a form of advocacy. [7 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • Publishing in a peer-reviewed journal 
 • Presenting scientific findings at professional conferences 
 • Accepting funding from an interest group 
 • Performing advisory roles within a scientific society 
 • Appearing before a court or legislative body as a topical expert 
 • Presenting scientific findings at public events 
 • Publishing in media that targets specific interest groups 
 • Performing advisory roles within an interest group 
 • Writing to Congress regarding environmental policy 
“Acceptable Conduct of Scientists” Instrument 
Please indicate the degree that scientists should exhibit each of the following practices. [7 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • Avoid all forms of advocacy 
 • Feel obligated to engage in advocacy 
 • Receive training to be more effective advocates 
 • Engage in advocacy to improve environmental policy 
 • Advocate if they distinguish between facts and values 
 • Work closely with managers and policy makers 
“Norms about the Acceptability of Scientists to Engage in Activism” Instrument 
Please indicate how unacceptable or acceptable you believe the following behaviors of scientists are. [7 response categories: “highly unacceptable” to “highly acceptable”] 
 • Providing research-based information to policy makers 
 • Donating money to environmental causes 
 • Offering policy recommendations in peer-reviewed publications 
 • Advocating for a policy in an editorial for public media 
 • Receiving and using funds from an advocacy group 
 • Providing leadership for advocacy groups 
Robinson et al. 2016  Participants in 43 workshops conducted by the Toolbox Project between March 2009 and October 2013 (N=355) “STEM Values” module 
Please indicate your level of disagreement or agreement with the following statements. [5 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • Objectivity implies an absence of values by the researcher. 
 • Incorporating one’s personal perspective in framing a research question is never valid. 
 • Value-neutral scientific research is possible. 
 • Determining what constitutes acceptable validation of research data is a value issue. 
 • Allowing values to influence scientific research is advocacy. 
Steel et al. 2017  For first four statements: 289 interdisciplinary scientists participating in 43 Toolbox workshops Slight adaptation of Robinson et al.’s (2016) “STEM Values” module (the following is used in place of the fifth statement: “Biomedical researchers should engage in advocacy related to their research.”) 
For fifth statement: 66 interdisciplinary health scientists participating in 7 Toolbox workshops The respondents for the new fifth statement were different from those who answered the first four statements (Steel et al. 2017, 25) 
StudySamplesKey Measurement Instruments
Lach et al. 2003  Four samples in the Pacific Northwest: university & federal agency scientists (N=155); managers of state & federal natural resource programs (N=167); members of public interest groups (N=119); & members of the “attentive public” (N=198) “Attitudes about Proper Roles of Scientists” Instrument 
We would like to know what you think should be the proper role of scientists in natural resource management decisions. Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statement. [5 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • Scientists should only report results and leave others to make management decisions. 
 • Scientists should report results and then interpret for others involved in management decisions. 
 • Scientists should work closely with managers and others to integrate scientific results into management decisions. 
 • Scientists should actively advocate for specific natural resource management decisions. 
 • Scientists should make decisions about natural resource management. 
Steel et al. 2004  Lach et al. (2003) samples Lach et al.’s (2003) “Attitudes about Proper Roles of Scientists” Instrument 
“Attitudes toward Positivism” Instrument 
In recent years there has been increasing debate about what makes for reliable scientific findings that can be used with confidence to make important decisions. Please take a moment to let us know how you characterize science and the scientific process by indicating your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements. [5 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • Use of the scientific method is the only certain way to determine what is true and false about the world. 
 • The advance of knowledge is a linear process driven by key experiments. 
 • Science provides objective knowledge about the world. 
 • It is possible to eliminate values and value judgments from the interpretation of scientific data. 
 • Facts describe true states of affairs about the world. 
Gray & Campbell 2009  1st International Marine Protected Areas Congress attendees from academic institutions (N=57); government agencies (N=73); nongovernment organizations (N=50); & other (N=19) Lach et al.’s (2003) “Attitudes about Proper Roles of Scientists” Instrument 
Steel et al.’s (2004) “Attitudes toward Positivism” Instrument 
Singh et al. 2014  Participants at 9 conservation- & ecology-related conferences that focused on ecology, environment, & land or natural resource management (N=508) slight adaptation of Lach et al.’s (2003) “Attitudes about Proper Roles of Scientists” Instrument (slight wording changes & an example of each role) 
Steel et al.’s (2004) “Attitudes toward Positivism” Instrument 
Reiners et al. 2013a  Non-student US members of the Ecological Society of America (N=1215) “Engagement in Advocacy Activities” Instrument 
How often do you provide financial support for an environmental cause as a private citizen? [6 response categories: “never” to “more than 12 times a year”] 
Approximately how much money do you donate to environmental causes each year? [6 response categories: “$0” to “more than $5000”] 
How important is it to you to engage in some personal environmental action each day (such as bicycling to work, recycling paper, or buying green products? [6 response categories: “not at all important” to “extremely important”] 
Approximately how often do you write letters to an editor, politician, or agency concerning an environmental cause, as a self-identified professional ecologist? [6 response categories: “never” to “more than 12 times a year”] 
How often do you speak publicly concerning an environmental cause, as a private citizen without referring to your ecological expertise? [6 response categories: “never” to “more than 12 times a year”] 
How often have you provided organizational leadership for or against an environmental cause such as prohibiting beach development? [4 response categories: “never” to “4 or more times”] 
Approximately what percentage of your scientific research is funded by an advocacy source such as The Nature Conservancy or the Electric Power Research Institute? [integer between 0 and 100] 
“Effects of Advocacy on Scientific Activity” Instrument 
An ecologist who is also an ‘environmental activist’ (i.e., is openly supportive of environmentalism and expresses beliefs that risks to the environment are real and serious) is just as likely to: [7 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • be objective. 
 • contribute to understanding nature. 
 • contribute to the betterment of society. 
 • have a long and fulfilling scientific career. 
“Attitudes toward Value-Free Objectivity in Research” Instrument 
Please indicate your level of disagreement or agreement with the following statements. [7 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • The pursuit of [basic/applied] research by ecologists is purely objective and value-free. 
 • The pursuit of [basic/applied] research by ecologists can be purely objective and value-free. 
 • The pursuit of [basic/applied] research by ecologists should be purely objective and value-free. 
Crawford et al. 2016  Ecology & biology undergraduate students (N=37), graduate students (N=77), & faculty (N=38) at the University of Georgia; science & policy professionals at state and federal government agencies (N=48); & science & policy professionals at conservation or environmental nongovernmental organizations (N=49) “Perceived Advocacy” Instrument 
Please indicate your belief about whether each activity is a form of advocacy. [7 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • Publishing in a peer-reviewed journal 
 • Presenting scientific findings at professional conferences 
 • Accepting funding from an interest group 
 • Performing advisory roles within a scientific society 
 • Appearing before a court or legislative body as a topical expert 
 • Presenting scientific findings at public events 
 • Publishing in media that targets specific interest groups 
 • Performing advisory roles within an interest group 
 • Writing to Congress regarding environmental policy 
“Acceptable Conduct of Scientists” Instrument 
Please indicate the degree that scientists should exhibit each of the following practices. [7 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • Avoid all forms of advocacy 
 • Feel obligated to engage in advocacy 
 • Receive training to be more effective advocates 
 • Engage in advocacy to improve environmental policy 
 • Advocate if they distinguish between facts and values 
 • Work closely with managers and policy makers 
“Norms about the Acceptability of Scientists to Engage in Activism” Instrument 
Please indicate how unacceptable or acceptable you believe the following behaviors of scientists are. [7 response categories: “highly unacceptable” to “highly acceptable”] 
 • Providing research-based information to policy makers 
 • Donating money to environmental causes 
 • Offering policy recommendations in peer-reviewed publications 
 • Advocating for a policy in an editorial for public media 
 • Receiving and using funds from an advocacy group 
 • Providing leadership for advocacy groups 
Robinson et al. 2016  Participants in 43 workshops conducted by the Toolbox Project between March 2009 and October 2013 (N=355) “STEM Values” module 
Please indicate your level of disagreement or agreement with the following statements. [5 response categories: “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”] 
 • Objectivity implies an absence of values by the researcher. 
 • Incorporating one’s personal perspective in framing a research question is never valid. 
 • Value-neutral scientific research is possible. 
 • Determining what constitutes acceptable validation of research data is a value issue. 
 • Allowing values to influence scientific research is advocacy. 
Steel et al. 2017  For first four statements: 289 interdisciplinary scientists participating in 43 Toolbox workshops Slight adaptation of Robinson et al.’s (2016) “STEM Values” module (the following is used in place of the fifth statement: “Biomedical researchers should engage in advocacy related to their research.”) 
For fifth statement: 66 interdisciplinary health scientists participating in 7 Toolbox workshops The respondents for the new fifth statement were different from those who answered the first four statements (Steel et al. 2017, 25) 
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal