scholarly journals Studying behaviours and attitudes towards science and technology

Impact ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (4) ◽  
pp. 27-29
Author(s):  
Naoko Kato-Nitta
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Capital ◽  
Social Stratification ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Data Science ◽  
Social Scientist ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Communication Model ◽  
Statistical Mathematics ◽  
Understanding Of Science

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.

scholarly journals How to take non-knowledge seriously, or “the unexpected virtue of ignorance”

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 385-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristian H. Nielsen ◽  
Mads P. Sørensen
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Democratic Deliberation ◽  
Understanding Of Science

This commentary argues that we need to take ignorance and non-knowledge seriously in the fields of science communication and public understanding of science. As much as we want ignorance to disappear, it seems that it is here to stay—in the sciences and in the rest of society. Drawing on the vast but scattered literature on ignorance and non-knowledge, we suggest that paying closer attention to these phenomena could be beneficial for science communicators. Despite the fact that ignorance and non-knowledge, just like knowledge, today are highly politicized fields, they may also open up for new lines of inquiry and may be key to more pluralistic and equal democratic deliberation about science and technology.

scholarly journals From top-down to bottom-up: a short history of science communication policy in Japan

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (03) ◽  
pp. Y01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masataka Watanabe
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
White Paper ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Main Theme ◽  
Ministry Of Education ◽  
Communication Policy ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Sports Science ◽  
Understanding Of Science

Japan's policy of “public understanding of science” (PUS) has shifted to “science communication” since 2003. That year, there were a number of simultaneous developments with regard to science communication. The key report that advocated for the promotion of science communication and a textbook on science communication were published then. The most important consequence was that the report triggered a policy change at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). The following year, MEXT published the White Paper on Science and Technology 2004, the main theme of which was concerned with science communication. Although the shift may have begun as a somewhat top-down contrivance, it has subsequently sunk down firm roots throughout Japan. In 2011 the Japanese Association for Science Communication was founded. People's awareness of science communication was significantly changed by the Great East Japan Earthquake that occurred on March 11, 2011. Why was such a policy shift possible? How did such a cascade effect occur? This paper will discuss the reasons behind these phenomena.

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
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Communication Theory ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Communication Model ◽  
The Public ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
The Way

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.

Role of Science Communication in beliefs, perceptions and knowledge of science and technology issues among European citizens

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Rubin ◽  
Giuseppe Pellegrini ◽  
Lubomir Šottník
Keyword(s):  
Digital Media ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Public Consultation ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Media Ecosystem ◽  
Understanding Of Science

<p>The last decade had seen an emergence of a new more dynamic and inconsistent media ecosystem. Digital media (i.e. social media) are accused by many independent researchers and influential observers, to have played a significant role in spread of science misinformation. Wide-ranging discussions about so-called ‘post-truth’ or ‘fake news’ phenomena have significantly involved science-related topics such as vaccines, GMO’s, climate change or homeopathy.</p><p>The issue of credibility and reliability of information is therefore central for science communication and public understanding of science.</p><p>CONCISE (“Communication role on perception and beliefs of EU Citizens about Science”), an EU research project intends to understand the role of science communication in beliefs, perceptions and knowledge of science and technology issues among European citizens from five countries: Spain, Italy, Portugal, Poland and Slovakia.</p><p>This paper presents preliminary quantitative results from Italian public consultation analysis regarding preferred citizen´s information channels and sources of scientific information. We will explore data to understand how trust in science is built, how citizens form opinions about the science, which sources of information they use and how they think can science communication could be more effective.</p>

scholarly journals Identifying diffusion patterns of research articles on Twitter: A case study of online engagement with open access articles

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Alperin ◽  
Charles J Gomez ◽  
Stefanie Haustein
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
The Public ◽  
Online Engagement ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Limited Diffusion

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.

Muslim Perceptions of Biological Evolution: A Critical Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Research

2019 ◽  
pp. 147-170
Author(s):  
Jessica Carlisle ◽  
Salman Hameed ◽  
Fern Elsdon-Baker
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Biological Evolution ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Or Education ◽  
Deficit Model ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Quantitative And Qualitative Research ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Science In Society

The topic of Muslims’ attitudes towards the theory of biological evolution has received increasing attention at the margins of the fields of public understanding of society, science communication or education and science in society. The methodology and methods employed in this work are primarily informed by research on attitudes towards evolution in the ‘West’, particularly in the US where the issue is highly politicized. Small, interview based qualitative and larger, survey based quantitative studies have explored degrees of acceptance or rejection of non-human and human evolution in a number of Muslim majority and Muslim minority contexts. The underlying rationale for these studies is often underpinned by a ‘deficit model’ in which Islam, or being Muslim, is usually posited as a particular obstacle to public understanding and acceptance of theory of evolution. This chapter summarizes these studies, analyzes the particularities of how deficit model approaches might be implicitly informing their findings, and reflects on the lack of reflexivity in much public understanding of science research on Muslim contexts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document