The research, which was funded by Wellcome, said 63% of people have high trust in scientists. The results are based on a national representative survey of 4,262 UK adults carried out by YouGov.

However, there was a political divide over whether scientists were viewed as being on the side of ‘people like them’, with 32% of Reform supporters agreeing compared with 71% of Green supporters.

Whether scientists were perceived to be on the same side as them outweighed other perceptions of trustworthiness such as expertise, the study said, with those with lower trust levels suspicious that scientists have different values to themselves.

Climate science had a strong link to identity divides, with trust in climate scientists ranging from 84% among Green supporters to just 19% for Reform UK supporters.

People who say they have low trust in scientists ( 38%) are nearly five times as likely as those with high trust ( 8%) to say “scientists are too woke”, while those in the middle range ( 23%) are around three times as likely as those with high trust to agree with this view.

There is a relationship between trust in other national institutions and trust in scientists, the study added, with 4% of those with low trust in scientists saying they trust the courts and legal system, compared with 40% of those with high trust in scientists.

Conspiracy theories was an issue, with 83% of those with low trust in vaccine scientists bringing up vaccine misinformation and 51% of those with middling trust, compared with 15% of high-trusters.

However, outright suspicion and cynicism of scientists was a minority position, with no group of scientists actively distrusted by more than three in 10 of the public, only 3% of the public saying they’re strongly suspicious of scientists in general and a further 16% being slightly suspicious.

The top two actions that the public said would increase their trust in the profession was scientists actively correcting misinformation ( 45%) and explaining how their work improves ordinary people’s lives ( 44%).

Professor Bobby Duffy, director of the Policy Institute at King’s College London, said: “We don’t want a public who treat science or scientists with blind faith: these are often complex, contested areas, and the public making informed judgements about who and what to trust is preferable to uncritical trust in scientists across the board. But we also want to avoid a society where your attitudes to science are set by a political identity, as that reduces judgement and nuance.

“Yet it would be a mistake to read this as a country simply divided into science advocates and science critics. The public splits into much more nuanced groups, and there is much we can do to demonstrate the trustworthiness of science and scientists – but this needs to be targeted and tailored for these different groups.”

Tracey Brown, director at Sense About Science, said: “Trust is more fragile between people and all kinds of institutions, and responses in the study point to the importance of being transparent, open about motives and clear about benefits. Having someone you trust to ask about a scientific issue correlates with higher trust in scientists. Knowing a scientist also makes it more likely you’ll be in a higher trust group. 

“These are things that scientists, and science mediators, should find quite easy to do. They require thoughtful communication and better care of relationships, rather than huge amounts of time and resource.” 

Lara Clements, associate director of engagement at Wellcome, added: “If science is to continue delivering benefits and earning the public’s trust, we need to strengthen the connection between research and people’s lives.

“In an increasingly polarised environment, trust in science cannot be taken for granted. It must be continually earned.”