Unraveling the Mystery: A Voodoo Doll Study Illuminates the Reasons Behind Scientists’ Harassment

What do voodoo dolls reveal about people’s feelings toward scientists? A new study tries to answer this question.

There’s concern that many people are growing angry and suspicious of scientific research. Instances of scientists facing hostility are on the rise. Yet, according to this study, “virtually nothing is known” about who might actually attack scientists. The research, published in Scientific Reports, aims to shed light on this issue.

The paper analyzed around 750 responses from two studies, making it the first effort to identify factors linked to harassment of scientists.

In their research, participants were given a chance to donate a small bonus of £1 to the Union of Concerned Scientists or keep it for themselves. They also signed a petition against violence towards scientists.

From a total of £359 offered, people donated £69.79. The study found that political views played a big role here; those with right-wing views donated less money.

Another part of the study asked participants to show how they felt by ‘attacking’ a digital voodoo doll representing a typical scientist—an older man in a lab coat. They could stick pins in the doll as a way to release negative energy. The more pins they added, the more aggressive their behavior was.

Researchers found major links between five factors: conspiracy thinking, cynicism toward science, feelings of deprivation, perceived threat, and attitudes towards harassment.

Vukašin Gligorić, the lead author and a PhD student at the University of Amsterdam, noted that distrust in the world, political views, and feelings of threat led to a higher acceptance of harassing scientists.

Interestingly, the study showed that cynicism about science—believing that scientists are untrustworthy—was a strong driver of such harassment. Additionally, viewing scientists as menacing and having darker personality traits like psychopathy or narcissism also played a role.

The paper suggests that promoting reasons to trust scientists and showing that they are not threats could help reduce this aggressive behavior.

Gligorić pointed out that the anti-science movement is gaining traction in many places. He believes changing people’s views will be tough since many see scientists as part of an establishment they are unhappy with.

“Scientists need to engage directly with the public and move away from private interests that damage trust,” Gligorić said. “People are often cynical about the systems around them and sometimes blame scientists as part of that issue. Therefore, scientists must also reflect on these systems and work towards improvement.”