scholarly journals Between understanding and appreciation. Current science communication in Denmark

2005 ◽  
Vol 04 (04) ◽  
pp. A02
Author(s):  
Kristian Hvidtfelt Nielsen

In this paper I use the concepts “understanding of science” and “appreciation of science” to analyze selected case studies of current science communication in Denmark. The Danish science communication system has many similarities with science communication in other countries: the increasing political and scientific interest in science communication, the co-existence of many different kinds of science communication, and the multiple uses of the concepts of understanding vs. appreciation of science. I stress the international aspects of science communication, the national politico-scientific context as well as more local contexts as equally important conditions for understanding current Danish science communication.

1993 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Gaskell ◽  
Daniel Wright ◽  
Colm O'Muircheartaigh

Research into the publics' interest in, knowledge of and attitudes towards science has captured the attention of politicians and educators. Sample survey research has been employed to assess the diverse aspects of the public understanding of science. However, surveys are subject to various biases that may affect the findings, calling into question both the reliability and the validity of the measures concerned. In this study we look at one common bias—that of context effects. Context effects occur when a question influences responses to later questions. The effects of answering one of four different sets of science questions (physical or life science, and easy or difficult questions) on what people report as their interest in science and what they think science is, were investigated using a split ballot format ( n = 2099). Two approaches from social psychology, framing and consistency, are used to predict the effects of these knowledge questions on subsequent responses. Context effects were found and were more in line with the framing explanation. The results signal the need for caution in interpreting findings from surveys of the public understanding of science.


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pintér Dániel Gergő

According to the thesis of this study adoption of the technological, social-psychological, moral and other changes surrounding us, tolerating and teaching each other are vital to successful coexistence of the different age-classes. In order to this – on one hand in our everyday life and expressly in pedagogical work – it is unavoidable to identify the main reasons establishing relations between the generations; i.e. what processes can be held liable for transformation of values and attitudes, while on the other hand it must be decided how to handle the challenges caused by the changes. This study approaches the characteristics of generation Z deviating from that of the former generation from science communication and educational aspects. It reviews the most important features of information society and the impact of technological development on world view, behaviour and discrepancy of the different age-classes. It attempts to identify those characteristics of transferring knowledge, consumption and use of media, which are definitive to the development of the relation to science of persons born after 1995, then it summarises the models of Public Understanding of Science relevant to generation Z. The second part of the study includes recommendation on the methodological framework of a progressive educational system, which is able to successfully serve the demands of the studied age-class, and can play role in forming the interest in science and preparedness of the digital generation.


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.


1998 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 126-128
Author(s):  
J. V. FIELD ◽  
FRANK A. J. L. JAMES

Art and science are both terms whose meanings have been subject to change over time. At the end of the twentieth century, the terms tend to be used antithetically. Current views of the relationship between the spheres of activity that they connote range from a sweeping dismissal of any connection to an opposing but less extreme conviction that scientists and artists have something in common. The latter belief apparently at least partly stems from an underlying feeling that at any one time both activities are, after all, products of a single culture. The woolly shade of C. P. Snow's idea of there being ‘two cultures’ in the Britain of the 1950s at once rises to view if one attempts to pursue analysis along these lines.In setting up a conference called ‘The Visual Culture of Art and Science from the Renaissance to the Present’ the organizing committee was not attempting to resolve any kind of debate that may be perceived to exist in regard to the separation or otherwise of the domains of art and science. Rather, we wished to bring together historians of science working on areas that are of interest to historians of art, and historians of art working on areas that are of interest to historians of science, as well as practising artists and scientists of the present time who show an interest in each others' fields. We were, of course, aware that this agenda raised questions in regard to present-day relationships between art and science, but we hoped that, as we were dealing with a range of historical periods, any light that was shed would be moderately illuminating rather than blindingly lurid. The meeting, which took place on 12–14 July 1995, mainly at the Royal Society in London, was organized jointly by the British Society for the History of Science, the Association of Art Historians and the Committee on the Public Understanding of Science (COPUS) – a joint committee of the Royal Institution, British Association and the Royal Society. The historical examples presented at the conference showed a wide variety of interactions between art and science. The success of the conference (it attracted an audience of about 200) suggested very strongly that art, which has a large public following, can be used to encourage an interest in science, whose public following, according to scientists, could be better.


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.


Author(s):  
Jessica Carlisle ◽  
Salman Hameed ◽  
Fern Elsdon-Baker

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 27-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devasmita Chakraverty ◽  
Sarah N. Newcomer ◽  
Kelly Puzio ◽  
Robert H. Tai

Research shows that early scientific interest is associated with science degree completion and career selection. However, little is known about the conditions that support early scientific interest. Using a “funds of knowledge” theoretical framework, this study examined the role of parents, family, and extended social networks in fostering early interest in science. Using interview narratives from 116 scientists (physicists and chemists) in the United States, we conducted a qualitative thematic content analysis. Findings suggest that children who become scientists in adulthood often received early, informal opportunities to use and manipulate material objects and discover how the world works. Second, families used a wide variety of scientific terms at home and encouraged children to pursue their interests whether in science or other fields. Third, these future scientists were often networked with extended family members or friends to observe and do science when they were quite young. Collectively, these findings highlight the specific ways in which families fostered early scientific interest and aided in supporting a student-directed learning environment.


2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (S260) ◽  
pp. 748-753
Author(s):  
Kevin Nolan

AbstractShortcomings in current science outreach contribute to a disconnection between science and society; prompting new requirements in thinking about what science outreach is and how it is planned and implemented. It is proposed here that central to successful outreach should be focus on identifying and communicating value in, and the relevance of, science; rather than necessarily attempting to inspire interest in, or understanding of science. This, coupled to world coordinated identification of key science outreach directives, messages and plans point to more effective science outreach relevant to the global community.


2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 385-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristian H. Nielsen ◽  
Mads P. Sørensen

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document