Researchers report 4% view changes positively

Arizona State University-affiliated researchers published a survey on May 19 showing that only 4% of U.S. academic scientists viewed recent federal science policy changes positively. The findings were described in a Commentary article in The Conversation by researchers involved in SciOPS, a five-year survey program on scientists’ views and public communication. The article said 93% of surveyed researchers had negative opinions of federal science policies since January 2025, and linked those views to lower funding, tougher recruiting and greater self-censorship. The survey drew 280 responses from scientists across 131 universities. ### Where did the 4% figure come from? The May 19 article said the result came from a survey of randomly sampled members of the academic science community participating in the SciOPS panel. The authors said they received responses from 280 scientists in fields including biology, chemistry, civil and environmental engineering, computer and information science engineering, geography and public health. The Conversation article was published on May 19 at 8:23 a.m. EDT and was later amplified on X by Catharine Young, who cited the 4% figure in a thread about the effect of policy changes on researchers. The article itself said the researchers were examining how Trump administration science-related policies were affecting universities and individual scientists. (theconversation.com) ### What did researchers say had changed inside universities? The survey authors wrote that just over half of scientists in their sample said their overall funding had declined since the second Trump administration took office in January 2025. Around one-quarter also reported declines in state, local or university internal funding, while 9% said internal funding had increased, which the authors said could reflect emergency support from universities. (theconversation.com) The same article said federal funding, diversity-related policies and visa policies had destabilized the research environment. The authors said respondents reported knock-on effects on the scientific workforce pipeline and on their ability to recruit internationally and domestically. They added that visa and immigration policies could be contributing to those hiring problems. (theconversation.com) ### How does this compare with other recent surveys? STAT reported on March 19 that a nationwide survey of nearly 1,000 NIH-funded researchers found many labs had cut staff, canceled research and warned trainees away from academic careers. More than a quarter of respondents had laid off lab members, more than two in five had canceled planned research, and only 35% of respondents whose grants were cut or delayed said their government funding had been fully restored by the end of 2025. (theconversation.com) STAT reported again on April 30 that a survey of almost 1,000 NIH-funded researchers found grant competition had become more difficult and that many scientists were adopting new tactics to keep funding and jobs. Those reports focused on biomedical researchers, while the SciOPS article covered a broader mix of academic science fields. ### What about self-censorship and academic freedom? (statnews.com) Ithaka S+R said in an April 20 issue brief that recent federal and state policies were affecting academic freedom within the research enterprise. The group said it collected 4,003 survey responses from researchers at U.S. academic institutions and found that concerns about academic freedom were a common theme in 663 open-ended comments. (statnews.com) The Conversation article said scientists in the SciOPS survey also reported increased self-censorship, stress and recruiting difficulties. The authors presented those responses as part of a wider picture of how policy changes were affecting research priorities, staffing and day-to-day work in universities. (sr.ithaka.org) ### Who is behind the survey, and what comes next? SciOPS is described in the May 19 article as a five-year research program designed to monitor, understand and improve how scientists communicate with the public. The authors said the survey sampled members of the academic science community already participating in that panel. (theconversation.com) Ithaka S+R said on April 20 that its broader national researcher survey would publish fuller results later in 2026. The SciOPS findings published on May 19 are already public through The Conversation article and the associated discussion on X by Catharine Young. (sr.ithaka.org) (theconversation.com)