scholarly journals Conversations between scientists and the public in radio phone-ins: an experimental approach to analyse public perception of science

2002 ◽  
Vol 01 (01) ◽  
pp. A02
Author(s):  
Matteo Merzagora ◽  
Sylvie Coyaud
Keyword(s):  
Public Perception ◽  
Experimental Approach ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Issue ◽  
Science Programme

"Il ciclotrone" is the weekly science programme of "Radio Popolare - Popolare Network". During the last 12 years, once or twice a month listeners have been able to directly ask questions to the guest scientists in the studios, or to express their point of view on some controversial scientific issue. Phone-ins at Radio Popolare are not filtered; regular and occasional listeners are used to communicate with or through the radio, and in doing so they contribute to the sense of spontaneity which characterise the programmes.

Science on TV: forms and reception of science programmes on French television

1996 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 231-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne de Cheveigné ◽  
Eliséo Véron
Keyword(s):  
Point Of View ◽  
The Public ◽  
Popularization Of Science ◽  
Ideal Form ◽  
Science Programme

We report a study of the reception by adults of science programmes broadcast on French television. Long, semi-directive interviews were carried out during which a number of short fragments of the programmes were shown. This research, which is part of a wider study (including children, scientists and professionals involved in the production of such programmes), shows that there are not one but several, very different, readings of science programmes. That implies that, from the point of view of the public, there is no unique, `ideal' form for a science programme and that, indeed, the term `popularization of science' can have several very different meanings.

scholarly journals Assessing Visual Preferences of the Local Public for Environmental Mitigation Measures of Hydropower Impacts—Does Point-of-View Location Make a Difference?

Water ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (21) ◽  
pp. 2985
Author(s):  
Berit Junker-Köhler ◽  
Håkon Sundt
Keyword(s):  
Public Perception ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Public Preference ◽  
User Perspective ◽  
The Public ◽  
Visual Preferences ◽  
Hydropower Impacts ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
Environmental Mitigation

Hydropower is a highly appreciated climate-friendly source of energy production. However, it has non-negligible negative impacts on the environment and landscape aesthetics where the energy is produced, affecting the recreational interests of the public using the respective local river spaces. The preferences of the local public are increasingly assessed and involved in the planning of mitigation measures for impacted rivers. Aesthetic assessment methods using a common user perspective, i.e., an “on-the-ground” perspective, could potentially be improved by using an aerial perspective facilitated by modern drone technology. Studies on the compatibility of these two perspectives of assessment in terms of public preference elicitation are lacking so far. In river Nea, Norway, we conducted a quantitative analysis of the visual preferences of the local public for different environmental mitigation measures related to weirs, minimum flow, and recreational infrastructure using both perspectives. The results indicate that there exist significant differences in the preferences for scenarios based on the two different visual perspectives, and that a compatibility between them cannot be assumed and therefore requires further investigation. Finally, based on our study setup and previous experience, we outline and propose a standardized procedure for the visualization of mitigation measures as an input to environmental design projects where public perception is incorporated.

Bridge Failure and Public Perception of Safety: Managing Situations the Public See as Dangerous

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alistair Oliver
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
General Public ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Structural Engineering ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Human Psychology ◽  
The Public ◽  
Perception Of Safety ◽  
Concise Information ◽  
Bridge Failure

<p>Occasionally, bridge projects present a challenge to the general public in terms of how they look or feel. This can happen during construction, demolition or even through the working operational lifespan. Concern can understandably arise if a structure looks or feels unstable or unsafe, for any reason. Some bridges seem ‘wrong’ even when they are quite safe.</p><p>The question of safety, and more particularly the perception of safety, are areas where structural engineering, the commercial realities of bridge ownership/operation, human psychology and public relations meet. When a bridge looks or feel unsafe, despite it being quite stable and without danger, the public may deem such a scenario unacceptable, and this can create friction with what is desirable from the point of view of the bridge owner or operator.</p><p>When the above occurs, the interface with the public and clients must be carefully managed. Clear, concise information is vital, communicated in non-jargon language. To persuade the uninitiated that something is safe, despite it looking the opposite, requires skills that bridge professionals sometimes lack. Identifying, understanding, and practicing these skills will sometimes feel counterintuitive to bridge practioners, but they are skills which nonetheless are sometimes essential.</p>

scholarly journals Genetics and biotechnologies in Italian mass media

2005 ◽  
Vol 04 (03) ◽  
pp. A03 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvio Mini
Keyword(s):  
Mass Media ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Front Page ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Core ◽  
Term Analysis ◽  
The Way

Several researchers operating in the sociological field have recently theorised that genetics and biotechnologies are at the core of the public perception of science. The present study aims at verifying empirically whether or not this is mirrored in Italian mass media, as well as at analysing the topics most frequently present in Italian newspapers and the economic and editorial reasons behind the results of editorial choices. Besides, it provides statistics about the major Italian newspapers published in the last third of 2002. This period has been chosen because some important news was published in December: it consequently offered the chance to carry out a long-term analysis as well as a study of the most important differences - in content and editorial lay-out - between scientific articles which are published in the appropriate sections inside the newspaper and those which make the front page. Ours are going to be purely quantitative considerations; but, from the point of view of the content, the data are sufficient to identify various narrative currents. These currents could be the object of further research on the frames used to contextualize the news and the reasons (anthropological, socio-cultural and editorial) for the way they are used by editorial staffs.

lmost all estimates of the figure of Alexander Solzhenitsyn are not related to literary criticism. Most studies evaluate his role, intentions and results. His figure is assessed in the context of the fate of the country, public perception and attitude to the country, which is Motherland for some, and mental and political enemy for the others. And for this purpose it is not even important who is right from the historical and political point of view. The point is who and how perceived the USSR and the entire Soviet project. Solzhenitsyn is seen as the enemy of the USSR and the Soviet project by those who popularized and helped him, and also according to his self-evaluation. Therefore, for those who identify themselves with the Soviet Union, its heritage and the entire Soviet project Solzhenitsyn represents the enemy and bearer of evil. For those who are hostile to the Soviet Union and the Soviet project, Solzhenitsyn is an ally in their struggle and bearer of good. Which of these parties is right is the issue of history and morality. 66% of Russian citizens support the first point of view, and the second point of view is supported by 25% of the population. Nowadays 88 % of Russian citizens know who Solzhenitsyn was. 31% consider him to be moral authority for them. 8% of the people believe that Solzhenitsyn presented true facts in his books.

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
pp. 260-275
Author(s):  
Victor V.  Aksyuchits
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Literary Criticism ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Moral Authority ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Self Evaluation ◽  
Political Ideas ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The People ◽  
Russian Intelligentsia

In the article the author studies the formation process of Russian intelligentsia analyzing its «birth marks», such as nihilism, estrangement from native soil, West orientation, infatuation with radical political ideas, Russophobia. The author examines the causes of political radicalization of Russian intelligentsia that grew swiftly at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries and played an important role in the Russian revolution of 1917.

FUNDAMENTAL AND APPLIED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH: сб.науч.тр./ OEAPS Inc.; редкол.: Флора Бертран (отв.ред.) [и др.]. - Берлин, Германия : OEAPS Inc., 2018. - 58 С.

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Мария Григорьевна Алпатова ◽  
Мария Игоревна Щеглова ◽  
Elmira Kalybaevna Adil’bekova ◽  
Nuradin Alibaev ◽  
Arunas Svitojus
Keyword(s):  
Service Sector ◽  
Applied Research ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Scientific Quality ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Main Criterion ◽  
The Public ◽  
Peer Reviewers ◽  
Verification Process

The conference is a major international forum for analyzing and discussing trends and approaches in research in the field of basic science and applied research. We provide a platform for discussions on innovative, theoretical and empirical research. The form of the conference: in absentia, without specifying the form in the collection of articles. Working languages: Russian, English Doctors and candidates of science, scientists, specialists of various profiles and directions, applicants for academic degrees, teachers, graduate students, undergraduates, students are invited to participate in the conference. There is one blind verification process in the journal. All articles will be initially evaluated by the editor for compliance with the journal. Manuscripts that are considered appropriate are then usually sent to at least two independent peer reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the article. The editor is responsible for the final decision on whether to accept or reject the article. The editor's decision is final. The main criterion used in assessing the manuscript submitted to the journal is: uniqueness or innovation in the work from the point of view of the methodology being developed and / or its application to a problem of particular importance in the public sector or service sector and / or the setting in which the efforts, for example, in the developing region of the world. That is, the very model / methodology, application and context of problems, at least one of them must be unique and important. Additional criteria considered in the consideration of the submitted document are its accuracy, organization / presentation (ie logical flow) and recording quality.

FUNDAMENTAL AND APPLIED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH April 2019: сб.науч.тр./ OEAPS Inc.; редкол.: Флора Бертран (отв.ред.) [и др.]. - Берлин, Германия : OEAPS Inc., 2019. - 98 C.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Изабелла Станиславовна Чибисова ◽  
Диана Ильгизаровна Шарипова ◽  
Альфия Галиевна Зулькарнаева ◽  
Ксения Александровна Дулова ◽  
Садег Амирзадеган ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Service Sector ◽  
Applied Research ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Scientific Quality ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Main Criterion ◽  
The Public ◽  
Peer Reviewers ◽  
Verification Process

The conference is a major international forum for analyzing and discussing trends and approaches in research in the field of basic science and applied research. We provide a platform for discussions on innovative, theoretical and empirical research. The form of the conference: in absentia, without specifying the form in the collection of articles. Working languages: Russian, English Doctors and candidates of science, scientists, specialists of various profiles and directions, applicants for academic degrees, teachers, graduate students, undergraduates, students are invited to participate in the conference. There is one blind verification process in the journal. All articles will be initially evaluated by the editor for compliance with the journal. Manuscripts that are considered appropriate are then usually sent to at least two independent peer reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the article. The editor is responsible for the final decision on whether to accept or reject the article. The editor's decision is final. The main criterion used in assessing the manuscript submitted to the journal is: uniqueness or innovation in the work from the point of view of the methodology being developed and / or its application to a problem of particular importance in the public sector or service sector and / or the setting in which the efforts, for example, in the developing region of the world. That is, the very model / methodology, application and context of problems, at least one of them must be unique and important. Additional criteria considered in the consideration of the submitted document are its accuracy, organization / presentation (ie logical flow) and recording quality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document