Once thought of as a staid profession, economists are increasingly repackaging themselves for public consumption. The rise of data journalism has helped catapult practitioners of the dismal science into the public domain. However, the gap between economists’ thinking and public opinion is often large. So are economists actually able to win hearts and change minds? Or, as is often the case with the media, is economics merely used to justify and re-enforce pre-existing beliefs?

ONCE thought of as a staid trade, economists are increasingly repackaging themselves for public consumption. The rise of data journalism has helped catapult practitioners of the dismal science into the public domain. However, the gap between economists’ thinking and public opinion is often large. So are economists actually able to win hearts and change minds? Or is economics merely used to justify and reinforce pre-existing beliefs?

A new paper* from political scientists at Duke University suggests that economists can influence public opinion, but only on technical policy issues. They are less effective when it comes to politically contentious questions. The authors surveyed how the public regard economists as a group, as well as the public’s views on policy issues on which economists have reached a consensus (ranging from immigration to the gold standard). They then compared how exposure to the "expert consensus" changed public opinion and public views of the profession as a whole.

So how did the dismal profession stack up? First the bad news. Despite the expert consensus, the majority of respondents, excluding those that were uncertain, disagreed with economists on every issue. Only 59% of respondents reported that they trusted economists when it came to “economic policy issues”, and for most that support was marginal. Wheras this distrust was equally spread amongst most demographic groups, the authors found that right-wing respondents were significantly less likely to trust economists.

There were, however, some more positive findings. When they were informed of the consensus position of economists, respondents were more likely to agree with them. However, the size of this effect varied according to the nature of the policy issue. Members of the public were more likely to agree with economists when quizzed on technical issues, such as the gold standard or forecasts for tax revenue. But on politically charged topics, for example trade with China or the merits of immigration, the economists’ consensus was far less likely to sway public opinion. Not only that, but when the respondents were informed that their own views did not match those held by most economists, their level of trust in them decreased markedly. This was not the case with the more technical issues – even when they disagreed with economists their trust was unaffected. It seems that on hot-button issues, the public uses economists to validate prejudices, and loses faith in them when they fail to do so.

If economists are to succeed in influencing, and perhaps even improving, public policy then convincing the public along is crucial. How then can economists offer better advice? Confining themselves to technocratic advice is neither helpful nor likely. There are too many inherently political issues on which economists have valuable advice to give. But perhaps by framing their advice in a more technical manner, for example measuring the benefits of immigration, rather merely than advocating it, economists can ensure that their advice is more effective in the public arena.

*“Economists and Public Opinion: Expert Consensus and Economic Policy Judgments” Christopher D. Johnston, Andrew O. Ballard. Working paper