Theory and measurement in the public understanding of science: a rejoinder to Bauer and Schoon

1993 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon D. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Public Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
Dimensional Measure ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Open Question

In the paper `Mapping variety in public understanding of science' Bauer and Schoon apply a multi-dimensional coding to responses to the open question `Please tell me, in your own words, what does it mean to study something scientifically?', and draw some conclusions about cultural diversity from their results. I argue here that this study was inappropriate for two main reasons: first, because the open question was formulated and fielded not to elicit information which would reveal diversity but to assess public scientific literacy against a three-dimensional measure of understanding of three aspects of science which are relevant to the conduct and resolution of public science policy debates; and second, because the data set used by Bauer and Schoon was small and biased.

Public Science Day and the public understanding of science in America

2000 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shane M. Daley
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Context ◽  
American Association ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Public Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
The World ◽  
Understanding Of Science

Many countries around the world have instituted day-long or week-long events celebrating science and technology. This article describes the “Public Science Day” sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of science, focusing especially on organizational context, goals, and activities.

Don’t Trust the Scientists! Rejecting the Scientific Consensus “Conspiracy”

2018 ◽  
pp. 201-213
Author(s):  
Josh Pasek
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Consensus ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Scientific Facts

Scholars assessing the public understanding of science have long regarded informing Americans about scientific facts as key to raising Americans’ scientific literacy. But many Americans appear to be aware of the scientific consensus and nonetheless reject it. The individuals who are aware of the scientific consensus and reject its tenets tend to distrust scientists. They also focus their rejection on particular issues for which they may be otherwise motivated. This rejection may be driven by elites, who argue against the scientific consensus on issues like climate change by asserting either that the science is unsettled or by contending that the scientific consensus is itself a conspiratorial ploy. Individuals’ patterns of beliefs seem to imply that they view scientific evidence they dislike as the result of a conspiracy.

How to (or not to) communicate science

2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 307-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.P.R. Rose
Keyword(s):  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Scientific Journals ◽  
Public Concern ◽  
Press Releases ◽  
Public Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Press ◽  
The Media ◽  
Understanding Of Science

Protagonists for ‘the public understanding of science’ still sometimes fail to recognize that there is also a need for ‘the scientists’ understanding of the public’ and that for most of science most of the time we are all public. ‘Science’ is communicated to ‘the public’ through popular books, museums, TV, the Internet, but far too often the present state of scientific belief is presented uncritically as the onward march of truth as discovered by Euro-American males. This has contributed to a widespread public concern, if not mistrust, in many areas of science, not least genetics and neuroscience. Although researchers often criticize the media for misrepresenting their work, the hype and simplifications often begin with the press releases put out by the researchers, their institutions and the scientific journals themselves. I conclude by looking more optimistically at the ways in which, by bringing natural science into theatre, novels and other art forms, the fragmentation of our culture may be diminished.

scholarly journals The better you know, the better you make your choice. The need for a scientific citizenship in the era of knowledge

2008 ◽  
Vol 07 (03) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pietro Greco
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Evolutionary Processes ◽  
Public Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
Understanding Of Science

Martin W. Bauer is right, two evolutionary processes are under way. These are quite significant and, in some way, they converge into public science communication: a deep evolution of discourse is unfolding, along with an even deeper change of the public understanding of science.

Between citizen and consumer: multiplying the meanings of the “public understanding of science”

1998 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 313-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mike Michael
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Culture ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Science Studies ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Status ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Sociological Studies

This paper explores how the “public understanding of science” might be reconceptualized in light of the recent sociological treatments of consumption. I consider the implications that the rise of consumer culture and the increasing aesthetisization of everyday life have for micro-and macro-sociological studies in the public understanding of science. In particular, I examine how consumer culture impacts upon the status of the “lay local” and the nature of citizenship as they relate to the public understanding of science and scientific literacy. Further, I explore how the discourses and techniques of public understanding of science studies might contribute to the formulation of the lay person as consumer. Finally; in light of these points, I formulate a number of research questions that might enable the development of the “public understanding of science.”

Understanding understanding: a model for the public learning of radioactivity

1999 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 267-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Alsop
Keyword(s):  
Informal Learning ◽  
Background Radiation ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Change Model ◽  
Potential Health ◽  
The Public ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Conceptual Change Model

While much of the work in the public understanding of science has focused on the public's appreciation of science and their familiarity with key scientific concepts, understanding the processes involved in learning science has largely been ignored. This article documents a study of how particular members of the public learn about radiation and radioactivity, and proposes a model to describe their learning—the Informal Conceptual Change Model [ICCM]. ICCM is a multidimensional framework that incorporates three theoretical dimensions—the cognitive, conative, and affective. The paper documents each of these dimensions, and then illustrates the model by drawing upon data collected in a case study. The emphasis of the analysis is on understanding how the members of the public living in an area with high levels of background radiation learn about the science of this potential health threat. The summarizing comments examine the need for a greater awareness of the complexities of informal learning.

The roles of rhetoric in the public understanding of science

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan G. Gross
Keyword(s):  
Rhetorical Analysis ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Minor Role ◽  
Contextual Model ◽  
Deficit Model ◽  
The Public ◽  
Science Rhetoric ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Social Scientific

In the public understanding of science, rhetoric has two distinct roles: it is both a theory capable of analysing public understanding and an activity capable of creating it. In its analytical role, rhetoric reveals two dominant models of public understanding: the deficit model and the contextual model. In the deficit model, rhetoric acts in the minor role of creating public understanding by accommodating the facts and methods of science to public needs and limitations. In the contextual model, rhetoric and rhetorical analysis play major roles. Rhetorical analysis provides an independent source of evidence to secure social scientific claims; in addition, it supplies the grounds for a rhetoric of reconstruction, one that reconstitutes the fact and facts of science in the public interest.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document