The human side of geoscientists: comparing geoscientists' and non-geoscientists' cognitive and affective responses to geology

Abstract. Geoscientists and non-geoscientists often struggle to communicate with each other. In this paper we aim to understand how geoscientists and non-geoscientists perceive geological concepts and processes, that is, how they think (cognitive responses) and feel (affective responses) about them. To this effect, using a mixed-methods approach, we compare mental models – people's representation of a phenomenon – of the subsurface, mining/quarrying, drilling, and flooding between geoscientists (n = 24) and non-geoscientists (n = 38). We identify four dominant themes which underlie their mental models: (1) degree of knowledge and familiarity, (2) beliefs about human interactions, (3) affective beliefs, and (4) beliefs about perceived impact of the processes. While the mental models of non-geoscientists focus more on the perceived negative environmental and economic impacts of geoscience, those of geoscientists focus more on human interactions. We argue that mental models are the result of beliefs, including both cognitive and affective components, and that both need to be acknowledged for effective dialogue between the two groups to take place.