scholarly journals Science writing and journalism

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 36-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexa Hime

As a graduate of the molecular biosciences, there are many different careers and postgraduate study options available to you, in science-related and non-scientific fields. The field of science communication is one which currently has a lot of ‘buzz’ about it, and the importance of science writers and journalists in engaging with the public is being recognized more and more.

1976 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuri V. Novozhilov ◽  
Jacques G. Richardson

The fiftieth anniversary of the death of Camille Flammarion, the great French astronomer, is the occasion for the authors of this article to review the beginnings of modern science writing. Flammarion's Popular Astronomy may be considered the first step in the popularization of science. The relation of science communication to other disciplines is discussed as well as the contemporary approach. One of the tasks of the popularizer is to present a correct image of science to the public. The authors conclude with a statement of UNESCO's involvement in the popularization of science.


Author(s):  
Julian Cribb ◽  
Tjempaka Sari

Open Science is about how we address the profound challenges which now confront humanity: climate, the food crisis, environmental degradation, resource scarcity and disease; through science communication. These call for the sharing of scientific knowledge among billions of humans, on a scale never before attempted. Open Science offers practical ways to communicate science in a highly networked world where billions of people still have little or no access to advanced knowledge or technologies. The authors describe low-cost, effective means to transfer knowledge to target audiences in industry, government, the community and to the public at large. The book features sections on good science writing, practical advice on how to develop communication and media strategies, ways to measure communication performance, how to handle institutional 'crises', how to deal with politicians and much more.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin R. Harrington ◽  
Ingrid E. Lofgren ◽  
Caroline Gottschalk Druschke ◽  
Nancy E. Karraker ◽  
Nedra Reynolds ◽  
...  

There is an urgent need for scientists to improve their communication skills with the public, especially for those involved in applying science to solve conservation or human health problems. However, little research has assessed the effectiveness of science communication training for applied scientists. We responded to this gap by developing a new, interdisciplinary training model, “SciWrite,” based on three central tenets from scholarship in writing and rhetoric: 1) habitual writing, 2) multiple genres for multiple audiences, and 3) frequent review and created an interdisciplinary rubric based on these tenets to evaluate a variety of writing products across genres. We used this rubric to assess three different genres written by 12 SciWrite-trained graduate science students and 74 non-SciWrite-trained graduate science students at the same institution. We found that written work from SciWrite students scored higher than those from non-SciWrite students in all three genres, and most notably thesis/dissertation proposals were higher quality. The rubric results also suggest that the variation in writing quality was best explained by the ability of graduate students to grasp higher-order writing skills (e.g., thinking about audience needs and expectations, clearly describing research goals, and making an argument for the significance of their research). Future programs would benefit from adopting similar training activities and goals as well as assessment tools that take a rhetorically informed approach.


mBio ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika C. Shugart ◽  
Vincent R. Racaniello

ABSTRACT Scientists must communicate about science with public audiences to promote an understanding of complex issues that we face in our technologically advanced society. Some scientists may be concerned about a social stigma or “Sagan effect” associated with participating in public communication. Recent research in the social sciences indicates that public communication by scientists is not a niche activity but is widely done and can be beneficial to a scientist's career. There are a variety of approaches that scientists can take to become active in science communication.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (04) ◽  
pp. N01
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Kunz Kollmann ◽  
Marta Beyer ◽  
Emily Howell ◽  
Allison Anderson ◽  
Owen Weitzman ◽  
...  

As several recent National Academies of Sciences reports have highlighted, greater science communication research is needed on 1) communicating chemistry, and 2) building research-practice partnerships to advance communication across science issues. Here we report our insights in both areas, gathered from a multi-year collaboration to advance our understanding of how to communicate about chemistry with the public. Researchers and practitioners from science museums across the U.S. partnered with academic social scientists in science communication to develop and conduct multi-strand data collections on chemistry communication and informal education. Our focus was on increasing interest in, the perceived relevance of, and self-efficacy concerning chemistry through hands-on activities and connecting chemistry to broader themes concerning everyday life and societal impacts. We outline challenges and benefits of the project that future collaborations can gain from and illustrate how our strands of work complemented each other to create a more complete picture of public perceptions of chemistry.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew H. Slater ◽  
Joanna K. Huxster ◽  
Emily Scholfield

Despite decades of concerted efforts to communicate to the public on important scientific issues pertaining to the environment and public health, gaps between public acceptance and the scientific consensus on these issues remain stubborn. One strategy for dealing with this shortcoming has been to focus on the existence of the scientific consensus. Recent science communication research has added support to this general idea, though the interpretation of these studies and their generalizability remains a matter of contention. In this paper, we describe results of a large qualitative interview study on different models of scientific consensus and the relationship between such models and trust of science, finding that familiarity with scientific consensus is rarer than might be expected. These results suggest that consensus messaging strategies may not be effective.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 522
Author(s):  
Anna Beniermann ◽  
Laurens Mecklenburg ◽  
Annette Upmeier zu Belzen

The ability to make evidence-based decisions, and hence to reason on questions concerning scientific and societal aspects, is a crucial goal in science education and science communication. However, science denial poses a constant challenge for society and education. Controversial science issues (CSI) encompass scientific knowledge rejected by the public as well as socioscientific issues, i.e., societal issues grounded in science that are frequently applied to science education. Generating evidence-based justifications for claims is central in scientific and informal reasoning. This study aims to describe attitudes and their justifications within the argumentations of a random online sample (N = 398) when reasoning informally on selected CSI. Following a deductive-inductive approach and qualitative content analysis of written open-ended answers, we identified five types of justifications based on a fine-grained category system. The results suggest a topic-specificity of justifications referring to specific scientific data, while justifications appealing to authorities tend to be common across topics. Subjective, and therefore normative, justifications were slightly related to conspiracy ideation and a general rejection of the scientific consensus. The category system could be applied to other CSI topics to help clarify the relation between scientific and informal reasoning in science education and communication.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric B. Brennan

Scientific information is a key ingredient needed to tackle global challenges like climate change, but to do this it must be communicated in ways that are accessible to diverse groups, and that go beyond traditional methods (peer-reviewed publications). For decades there have been calls for scientists to improve their communication skills—with each other and the public—but, this problem persists. During this time there have been astonishing changes in the visual communication tools available to scientists. I see video as the next step in this evolution. In this paper I highlight three major changes in the visual communication tools over the past 100 years, and use three memorable items—bamboo, oil and ice cream—and analogies and metaphors to explain why and how Do-it-Yourself (DIY) videos made by scientists, and shared on YouTube, can radically improve science communication and engagement. I also address practical questions for scientists to consider as they learn to make videos, and organize and manage them on YouTube. DIY videos are not a silver bullet that will automatically improve science communication, but they can help scientists to 1) reflect on and improve their communications skills, 2) tell stories about their research with interesting visuals that augment their peer-reviewed papers, 3) efficiently connect with and inspire broad audiences including future scientists, 4) increase scientific literacy, and 5) reduce misinformation. Becoming a scientist videographer or scientist DIY YouTuber can be an enjoyable, creative, worthwhile and fulfilling activity that can enhance many aspects of a scientist’s career.


F1000Research ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 209
Author(s):  
Andrea Boggio ◽  
Giorgio Scita ◽  
Carmen Sorrentino ◽  
David Hemenway ◽  
Andrea Ballabeni

Background: Exchanges between scientists and nonscientists are critical to realizing the social value of basic research. These exchanges rest in part on the willingness and ability of scientists to engage effectively in science communication activities. In this paper, we discuss the perception and willingness of basic scientists in the biological and biomedical fields to engage in science outreach. Methods: The analysis is based on qualitative data collected as part of a survey on the social value of basic research and is framed by the theory of planned behavior. This is a well-established theory of human behavior that relies on the premise that a person’s intention to engage in a behavior is the single best predictor of whether that person will in fact engage in that behavior. Results: Our data show that, while bioscientists maintain a positive attitude towards science communication, their intentions are influenced by some negative feelings with regard to how nonscientists react to science communication efforts. Interactions with institutional actors, governmental bodies and the public are particularly problematic. On the other hand, interactions with clinicians and patients are framed in positive terms. Finally, some study participants raised concerns as to their ability to communicate science effectively, the availability of time and resources, and the lack of proper rewards, particularly in terms of career advancement, for those who engage in science efforts. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that bioscientists' intentions to engage in science communication efforts must be better studied to develop empirically-informed interventions to increase scientists’ participation in science outreach efforts.


Author(s):  
Timothy G Harrison ◽  
Dudley E Shallcross

There are myriad benefits to science departments that have a public engagement in science portfolio in addition to any recruitment of new undergraduates. These benefits are discussed in this paper and include: improving congruence between A level and first year undergraduate courses, training in science communication and the breaking down of barriers between the public and universities. All activity requires investment of personnel and incurs a financial cost. Small scale activities may be able to absorb this cost, but ultimately as the portfolio grows this will become an increasing drain on resources. Bristol ChemLabS Outreach has, from the very start, set out to be fully sustainable financially and in terms of personnel. A very important component is the full support of the senior management team. In this paper we discuss how we have achieved this.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document