scholarly journals Mapping mental models of science communication: How academics in Germany, Austria and Switzerland understand and practice science communication

2022 ◽  
pp. 096366252110657
Author(s):  
Sabrina Heike Kessler ◽  
Mike S. Schäfer ◽  
David Johann ◽  
Heiko Rauhut

The mental models that individual scholars have of science communication – how it works, what it is supposed to achieve and so on – shape the way these academics actually communicate to the public. But these mental models, and their prevalence among scholars, have rarely been analysed. Drawing on a large-scale, representative web survey of academics at universities in Germany, Austria and Switzerland ( n = 15,778) from 2020, we identify three mental models that are prevalent among scholars, and that correspond to conceptual models found in science communication theory: ‘Public Understanding of Science’, ‘Public Engagement with Science’ and ‘Strategic Science Communication’. The results suggest that the ‘Strategic Science Communication’ model is particularly prevalent among academics in precarious employment and female scholars. Extrinsically motivated academics, that is, those under pressure to win grants, also seem to use science communication more strategically. The ‘Public Engagement’ model is prevalent among older and female scholars, while ‘Public Understanding’ is particularly prevalent among scholars who find their work especially meaningful. Findings also reveal that academics’ mental models largely align with the way they practice science communication.

Author(s):  
Julia Metag

The visibility and invisibility of scientific knowledge, its creation, and of scientists are at the core of science communication research. Thus, prominent paradigms, such as the public understanding of science or public engagement with science and technology, have implications for the visibility of scientific knowledge in the scientific community and among the public. This article posits that visibility in science communication is achieved with the availability of scientific knowledge, the approval of its dissemination, and its accessibility to third parties. The public understanding of science and public engagement with science paradigms emphasize different aspects of visibility with the latter focusing on the visibility of the creation of scientific knowledge more than public understanding of science which focuses on the knowledge itself. The digital information environment has engendered new formats and possibilities for visibility but also new risks, thereby creating tensions in science communication.


Impact ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (4) ◽  
pp. 27-29
Author(s):  
Naoko Kato-Nitta

What makes research important is an important philosophical question that is a consideration for many researchers. Further important considerations are the public's perception of science and how an individual's perception of science and technology is shaped. These are some of the complex ideas that social scientist Dr Naoko Kato-Nitta, Department of Statistical Data Science, Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Japan, is exploring. She is working on a series of projects related to public perceptions and attitudes towards different scientific disciplines and fields. She hopes that answering such important questions will facilitate the creation of a science communication model for the public understanding of science. Kato-Nitta's research focuses on human behaviour and psychology and how it relates to issues at the interface of technology and society. A key question that she is seeking to answer from the standpoint of cultural capital is how the extent of the general public's participation in science communication can be determined. In the first research to connect social stratification theory and science communication research, Kato-Nitta divided the concept of Bourdieu's cultural capital into two sub-concepts: scientific and technical cultural capital and literary and artistic cultural capital. She went on to consider how these two types of cultural capital affect the exhibit-viewing behaviours of the general public.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren Kirby

Online content is changing the way the public accesses and understands science. The staggering number of often conflicting online sources about science makes it difficult for the lay public to know where to turn in search of accurate scientific information. This project will examine how the nature of online content might be affecting how the public learns about science. Through textual content analyses, it will examine the chain of communication (scientists→online media→public) and document how scientific information evolves. Okanagan Specialty Fruits’ Arctic apple, a genetically modified organism (GMO) that has had the polyphenol oxidase (PPO) gene silenced, will be used as a case study. Three primary themes guide my research: the public understanding of science (PUS), the communication of risk and uncertainty, and social epistemology. The primacy of the PUS movement in public venues for science makes it an important theory for my project, while theories of risk/uncertainty and social epistemology will inform my analysis. My results suggest that: 1) stories about science often include over and understatements of uncertainties and risks; 2) online media stories apply rhetorical frames when reporting scientific information, but the way in which framing is used appears to be reflective of whether the author wishes to persuade their audience; and 3) the rhetorical frames used by online stories about science are not typically integrated into the public’s commentary in a meaningful way, supporting the notion that audiences are active rather than passive and that the public seeks out content that complements their pre-existing beliefs.


2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Alperin ◽  
Charles J Gomez ◽  
Stefanie Haustein

The growing presence of research shared on social media, coupled with the increase in freely available research, invites us to ask whether scientific articles shared on platforms like Twitter diffuse beyond the academic community. We explore a new method for answering this question by identifying 11 articles from two open access biology journals that were shared on Twitter at least 50 times and by analyzing the follower network of users who tweeted each article. We find that diffusion patterns of scientific articles can take very different forms, even when the number of times they are tweeted is similar. Our small case study suggests that most articles are shared within single-connected communities with limited diffusion to the public. The proposed approach and indicators can serve those interested in the public understanding of science, science communication, or research evaluation to identify when research diffuses beyond insular communities.


2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 1507-1515 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Concannon ◽  
Muriel Grenon

The promotion of the public understanding of science has many positive impacts on society, including expanding the reach of science to a broader range of individuals and having a favourable impact on the economy. It also results in many benefits for researchers involved, including the development of their communication skills and improvement in the quality of their research. Despite increased awareness of the importance of public engagement (PE), the involvement of researchers has only slightly increased in the last 10 years. Time constraints, lack of opportunity and lack of funding are the main barriers preventing their participation. We propose that joining an existing PE programme can be a good way for scientists to overcome these barriers. We list specific examples of established activities that are easy for researchers to get involved in, allowing them to share their enthusiasm for science.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Roche ◽  
Laura Bell ◽  
Mairéad Hurley ◽  
Grace D’Arcy ◽  
Brendan Owens ◽  
...  

The COVID-19 global pandemic has transformed the relationship between science and society. The ensuing public health crisis has placed aspects of this relationship in harsh relief; perceptions of scientific credibility, risk, uncertainty, and democracy are all publicly debated in ways unforeseen before the pandemic. This unprecedented situation presents opportunities to reassess how certain disciplines contribute to the public understanding of science. Space education has long provided a lens through which people can consider the intersection of the natural world with society. Space science is critical to understanding how human activity and pollution affect global warming, which in turn, inextricably links it to perceptions of the natural world, environmental change, science communication, and public engagement. The pandemic has caused a dramatic shift in how space education projects connect with public audiences, with participation pivoting to online engagement. This transition, coupled with the renewed societal examination of trust in science, means that it is an ideal time for the field of space education to reflect on its development. Whether it evolves into its own distinct field, or remains an area that straddles disciplinary boundaries, such as science education, communication, and public engagement, are crucial considerations when scientific trust, accountability, and responsibility are in question. This paper describes the current state of space education, recent advances in the field, and relevant COVID-19 challenges. The experience of an international space education project in adapting to online engagement is recounted, and provides a perspective on potential future directions for the field.


2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 3-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Pettit ◽  
Jacy L. Young

This paper introduces the special issue dedicated to ‘Psychology and its Publics’. The question of the relationship between psychologists and the wider public has been a central matter of concern to the historiography of psychology. Where critical historians tend to assume a pliant audience, eager to adopt psychological categories, psychologists themselves often complain about the public misunderstanding of them. Ironically, both accounts share a flattened understanding of the public. We turn to research on the public understanding of science (PUS), the public engagement with science (PES) and communications studies to develop a rich account of the circuitry that ties together psychological experts and their subjects.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-26
Author(s):  
Bernard Appiah ◽  
Anubhuti Poudyal ◽  
David A. Anum ◽  
George Appiah ◽  
Andrew Christopher Wesuta ◽  
...  

Abstract Despite many water, sanitation, hygiene (WASH) and other environmental health challenges in sub-Saharan Africa, little is known about interactions involving scientists, journalists and the public to aid public understanding of the relationship between WASH and health. Using purposive sampling, we conducted key informant interviews and focus group discussions with scientists, journalists and members of the public in Ghana and Uganda to identify issues associated with the promotion of public engagement with WASH and other environmental health issues. An inductive thematic analysis was used to explore the evidence, challenges and opportunities of public engagement. The effectiveness of public engagement was constrained by poor interactions between scientists and journalists and limited understanding among the public on WASH and other environmental health issues. Challenges identified included inadequate scientists–journalists collaborations, scientists' lack of time, pressure from media organizations and concerns about journalists' inadequate capacity to communicate environmental issues due to lack of training. Possible solutions included increased interactions, science communication training and using public information officers as knowledge brokers between scientists and journalists to boost public engagement with WASH and other environmental health issues. Our study contributes to the literature on the need to actively engage the public with WASH and other environmental health concerns.


F1000Research ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 2744 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre Morin-Chassé

Science communication has the potential to reshape public understanding of science. Yet, some research findings are more difficult to explain and more likely to be misunderstood. The contribution of this paper is threefold. It opens with a review of fascinating interdisciplinary literature on how scientific research about human genetics is disseminated in the media, and how this type of information could influence public beliefs and world views. It then presents the theoretical framework for my research program, providing a logical basis for how messages about human genetics may influence people's beliefs about the role of genes in causing human traits. Based on this reasoning, I formulate the genetic interpolation hypothesis, which predicts that messages about specific research findings in behavioral genetics can lead members of the public to infer greater genetic causation for other social traits not mentioned in the content of the message. While this framework offers clear, testable predictions, some questions remain unaddressed. For instance, what kind of message formats are persuasive enough to alter people's views? The third contribution of this paper is to begin to address this question empirically. I present the results of a survey experiment that was designed to test whether a simple, short paragraph about behavioral genetics is a powerful enough stimulus to cause the genetic interpolation effect.


2012 ◽  
Vol 11 (04) ◽  
pp. C02 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brice Laurent

Science museums perform representations of science and that of its publics. They have been called to intervene in nanotechnology within global public policy programs expected to develop the field. This paper discusses the case of European science museums. It starts by examining the case of a European project that involved science museums working on nanotechnology. This example illustrates a "democratic imperative" that European science museums face, and which implies a transformation of their public role. It offers a path for the analysis of the current evolution of European science communication perspective – from "public understanding of science" to "scientific understanding of the public" – and of the political construction this evolution enacts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document