Unveiling the Landmark Breakthrough Science Study

The latest research into public attitudes toward cutting-edge scientific advancements has captured widespread attention, revealing a nuanced picture of hope intertwined with apprehension. Titled "How Society Feels About Breakthrough Science," this comprehensive initiative by Leaps by Bayer in collaboration with Boston Consulting Group (BCG) and Ipsos UK stands as one of the largest global surveys on the topic. Conducted in 2025, the quantitative phase gathered responses from over 13,000 adults across 13 diverse countries, providing a robust snapshot of societal sentiments. A follow-up qualitative study in 2026 delved deeper through 21 in-depth interviews, primarily with Generation Z participants in China, Germany, and the United States, to decode the underlying drivers of these views.

This dual approach—blending broad statistical data with personal narratives—offers invaluable insights for researchers, policymakers, and educators navigating the public discourse on innovation. The study spotlights four pivotal breakthrough technologies: artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare, cell and gene therapies (often abbreviated as CGT), new genomic techniques (NGTs) in agriculture, and cultivated meat. These areas represent transformative potential in addressing global challenges like disease, food security, and climate resilience, yet they also evoke varied emotional responses shaped by cultural, economic, and experiential factors.

A Surge of Optimism for the Trajectory of Science

At its core, the study paints an encouraging portrait of faith in scientific progress. Globally, 72 percent of respondents expressed optimism about the direction in which science and technology are heading—a figure that starkly outpaces confidence in the economy (39 percent) or politics and global affairs (31 percent). This enthusiasm peaks in lower- and middle-income nations, where urgent needs amplify the perceived promise of innovation. For instance, 94 percent in Nigeria and 86 percent in China voiced positive outlooks, compared to more tempered views in high-income countries like Japan (46 percent), France (53 percent), and Germany (54 percent).

Respondents see breakthroughs as key to tackling pressing issues: 71 percent are optimistic about improvements in human health, 69 percent about better access to nutritious food, and 58 percent about environmental solutions. This belief underscores a societal consensus that science holds the tools to elevate quality of life, even as implementation hurdles loom.

Regional Variations: From Emerging Markets' Enthusiasm to Western Caution

Diving into geographic differences reveals telling patterns tied to income levels and lived realities. In lower-middle-income countries like Nigeria and India, openness to innovations runs high, fueled by immediate threats such as food scarcity and health crises. Upper-middle-income nations like Brazil, Mexico, and China echo this, with 85 percent in China willing to consult an AI doctor and 91 percent in Nigeria expressing similar comfort.

High-income regions present a more divided landscape. Europe shows restraint—France at 51 percent openness to AI doctors, Germany at 58 percent—while the U.S. hovers at 50 percent. Japan lags similarly. Trust in health authorities plays a pivotal role here: 86 percent in Nigeria versus 56 percent in the U.S. and 52 percent in Germany. These disparities highlight how proximity to challenges influences receptivity, with affluent societies prioritizing systemic strains like overburdened healthcare over agricultural vulnerabilities, where only about 1 percent of the workforce engages directly.

Health Breakthroughs Garner Strongest Support

Among the technologies surveyed, health-focused innovations command the broadest approval. Cell and gene therapies top the list, with 74 percent global optimism for their potential to cure diseases. This support spans generations: 78 percent of Millennials, 76 percent of Gen Z, 73 percent of Gen X, and 70 percent of Baby Boomers and older. Even 59 percent agree development is worthwhile despite potential affordability issues for some, rising to 82 percent among those knowledgeable about the tech.

AI in healthcare follows closely at 64 percent positive sentiment. Majorities believe it accelerates discoveries (70 percent), enhances diagnoses (68 percent), and expands access (59 percent), such as to mental health services. Notably, 66 percent are comfortable with doctors using AI, and 69 percent would adopt approved AI health tools themselves—a figure climbing to 76 percent among Gen Z. Yet, acceptance is conditional on augmentation rather than replacement of human expertise, emphasizing 'augmented care' over pure automation.

For deeper insights, explore the full 2025 quantitative report, which details these trends with granular data visualizations.

Agricultural Innovations Meet Greater Skepticism

In contrast, food and agriculture technologies elicit more hesitation. New genomic techniques for crops garner 56 percent positivity, bolstered by links to climate resilience—75 percent of climate-concerned respondents view them favorably. Acceptance varies by regulation: higher in permissive contexts like Australia, Brazil, China, Japan, and the U.S., lower in the EU at 47 percent due to stringent GMO rules.

Cultivated meat trails at 39 percent positive, with 40 percent neutral and 19 percent negative. Likelihood to try it peaks in Nigeria (81 percent), Brazil (70 percent), and Mexico (65 percent), dipping in high-meat-consumption affluent nations like Japan (32 percent likely), France, and Germany (both 39 percent). Omnivores (54 percent likely) outpace vegetarians and vegans (42-45 percent), revealing barriers around 'naturalness' and unfamiliarity.

The Power of Knowledge and Institutional Trust

Knowledge emerges as a strong predictor of positivity across all technologies—greater understanding correlates with higher acceptance. Trust in health authorities amplifies this: those trusting them (62 percent globally) show 84 percent optimism for health improvements versus 52 percent for the distrustful. Regional gaps persist, with emerging markets exhibiting higher confidence.

Information overload affects 53 percent, disproportionately impacting lower-middle-income countries (80 percent) and Gen Z (64 percent). Only 40 percent feel their views influence policy, underscoring a perceived disconnect between public sentiment and decision-making.

Three Mindsets: Emotional Lenses on Innovation

The qualitative phase identifies three fluid mindsets transcending demographics: Optimists embrace science as a benevolent force for progress; Rationalists weigh evidence, safety, and regulation; Skeptics prioritize values like naturalness, fairness, and human connection, wary of overreach. These shift contextually—for example, a CGT skeptic might accept it for a loved one's dire illness if doctor-recommended.

• Optimists: High trust, younger skew, eager for solutions.
• Rationalists: Pragmatic, persuadable via transparency.
• Skeptics: Value-protective, not anti-science but cautious.

Healthcare evokes more optimism; agriculture triggers skepticism over artificiality. Check the Decoding the 'Why' report for interview excerpts illuminating these dynamics.

Generation Z: Balancing Hope and Heightened Anxiety

Gen Z embodies the study's central tension—high optimism (71 percent positive on AI healthcare) paired with acute concerns, especially in the U.S. (42 percent positive on AI's health impact versus 72 percent elsewhere). Digital natives with 72 percent self-reported AI familiarity, they fear job displacement, empathy erosion, inaccuracies, and accountability voids. Yet, they crave human-augmented AI and ethical advancements, responding well to participatory engagement like citizen panels.

Rapid Change Fuels Underlying Anxiety

Beneath the optimism lies unease over the world's accelerating pace: 77 percent worry about AI oversight lacks, 74 percent fear errors, and 48 percent cite CGT side effects. Broader issues include 82 percent climate concern and policy misalignment. This anxiety peaks among youth exposed to tech's double-edged sword, calling for proactive trust-building.

Implications for the Academic and Research Community

For universities and researchers, these findings spotlight opportunities and imperatives. Science communication must tailor to mindsets—benefits for Optimists, evidence for Rationalists, value alignment for Skeptics. Enhancing literacy bridges knowledge gaps, while interdisciplinary programs in ethics and public engagement can foster societal buy-in. Collaborations with industry and regulators, as seen in Leaps by Bayer's approach, exemplify pathways to align innovation with public needs.

Academia plays a crucial role in addressing trust deficits, perhaps through transparent research dissemination and student-led outreach. As breakthroughs accelerate, higher education must equip the next generation not just with technical prowess but with skills to navigate public perceptions.

Charting the Path Forward: Recommendations and Outlook

The studies propose actionable strategies: visible governance for AI, equitable access assurances for CGT, climate-linked narratives for NGTs, and sensory verification for cultivated meat. Emphasize human elements, pre-competitive transparency, and multi-channel engagement blending digital and traditional formats.

Looking ahead, as technologies mature, sustained dialogue will be key to converting neutrality into support and mitigating anxiety. This research not only validates science's societal value but urges a collective effort to ensure breakthroughs benefit all, heralding a future where optimism translates into tangible progress.

Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash