scholarly journals SCIENCE-EDU-COMMUNICATION: TRENDS REVEAL IN 20 YEARS OF SCIENCE COMMUNICATION RESEARCH

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 793-805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Yufeng Wu ◽  
Nathan M. Truong ◽  
Hsin-Yen Lu ◽  
Yuen-Hsian Tseng ◽  
Chun-Yen Chang
Keyword(s):  
Science Education ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Scientometric Analysis ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scholarly Output ◽  
Public Engagement With Science ◽  
Scientometric Method ◽  
Education Science ◽  
Communication Methods

By investigating scholarly output in science communication from 1997 to 2018, this research sought evidence that science education has been increasingly focusing on communication methods to reach the public. Through an automatic scientometric method, this study analyzed 1300 articles published in two leading journals in the field of science communication. As a result, seven trends were revealed and categorized into three themes: Public engagement with science (PES); Media and science (MS); and Issues in science (IS). Furthermore, PES and MS scholarly output were found increased significantly. The findings confirmed the goal of this research. However, it then suggested a research area of bridging science education and science communication that is currently less explored. Given increased focus towards PES and MS, these fields are primed for further collaboration to more engage the public in science learning. Keywords: CATAR, scientometric analysis, science communication, science education, science-edu-communication.

scholarly journals Merging Science Education into Communication: Developing and Validating a Scale for Science Edu-Communication Utilizing Awareness, Enjoyment, Interest, Opinion formation, and Understanding Dimensions (SEC-AEIOU)

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (17) ◽  
pp. 4551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Yufeng Wu ◽  
Shannah Pinhsuan Wu ◽  
Chun-Yen Chang
Keyword(s):  
Science Education ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Life Experiences ◽  
Daily Life ◽  
Opinion Formation ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
The Public ◽  
Reliable Instrument ◽  
Education Science ◽  
Robust Framework

For better understanding of how the public perceive the information in science communication; this study sought to develop the scale of Science Edu-Communication (SEC), an instrument to measure AEIOU: Awareness; Enjoyment; Interest; Opinion formation; and Understanding. The AEIOU framework was adopted for use as the major component of SEC to depict participants’ general perceptions of science communication from their daily life experiences. Responses from 121 participants were analysed using exploratory factor analysis; item discrimination; and qualitative coding analysis. Results support SEC-AEIOU as a valid and reliable instrument to measure the effectiveness of science communication experiences. Additionally; SEC-AEIOU can serve as a framework for research and practice to bridge science communication and science education. In particular; science communicators; educators; and institutions that engage in science communication and educational activities may benefit from such a metric. This scale seeks to assist in building a robust framework to facilitate the trend of bridging science communication and science education: Science Edu-Communication.

scholarly journals Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 522
Author(s):  
Anna Beniermann ◽  
Laurens Mecklenburg ◽  
Annette Upmeier zu Belzen
Keyword(s):  
Science Education ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Scientific Data ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Informal Reasoning ◽  
The Public ◽  
Fine Grained ◽  
Societal Issues ◽  
Category System

The ability to make evidence-based decisions, and hence to reason on questions concerning scientific and societal aspects, is a crucial goal in science education and science communication. However, science denial poses a constant challenge for society and education. Controversial science issues (CSI) encompass scientific knowledge rejected by the public as well as socioscientific issues, i.e., societal issues grounded in science that are frequently applied to science education. Generating evidence-based justifications for claims is central in scientific and informal reasoning. This study aims to describe attitudes and their justifications within the argumentations of a random online sample (N = 398) when reasoning informally on selected CSI. Following a deductive-inductive approach and qualitative content analysis of written open-ended answers, we identified five types of justifications based on a fine-grained category system. The results suggest a topic-specificity of justifications referring to specific scientific data, while justifications appealing to authorities tend to be common across topics. Subjective, and therefore normative, justifications were slightly related to conspiracy ideation and a general rejection of the scientific consensus. The category system could be applied to other CSI topics to help clarify the relation between scientific and informal reasoning in science education and communication.

scholarly journals A survey to gather perspectives of DBT/Wellcome Trust India Alliance-funded researchers on public engagement with science

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 269
Author(s):  
Sarah Iqbal ◽  
Banya Kar
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Funding Agency ◽  
Contributing Factors ◽  
The Public ◽  
Structural Support ◽  
Professional Recognition ◽  
Science Funding ◽  
Public Engagement With Science

Lately, the Indian research ecosystem has seen an upward trend in scientists showing interest in communicating their science and engaging with non-scientific audiences; however, the number and variety of science communication or public engagement activities undertaken formally by scientists remains low in the country. There could be many contributing factors for this trend. To explore this further, the science funding public charity in India, DBT/Wellcome Trust India Alliance (India Alliance), in a first of its kind of study by a funding agency in India, surveyed its 243 research grantees in November 2020 requesting their views on public engagement with science in India through an online survey. The survey included both quantitative as well as open-ended questions to assess the understanding of, participation in, and attitude of India Alliance Fellows/Grantees towards public engagement with research, identify the enablers, challenges, and barriers to public engagement for India Alliance Fellows/Grantees, understand the specific needs (training/capacity-building, funding, etc.) and develop recommendations for India Alliance as well as for the larger scientific ecosystem in the country. The survey showed that India Alliance grantees are largely motivated to engage with the public about science or their research but lack professional recognition and incentives, training and structural support to undertake public engagement activities.

scholarly journals Communicating astronomy with the public: perspectives of an international community of practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (03) ◽  
pp. A11
Author(s):  
Sara Anjos ◽  
Pedro Russo ◽  
Anabela Carvalho
Keyword(s):  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
International Community ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Engagement With Science ◽  
Public Perspectives

Communities of practice in science communication can make important contributions to public engagement with science but are under-researched. In this article, we look at the perspectives of a community of practice in astronomy communication regarding (relations with) their public(s). Most participants in this study consider that public(s) have several deficits and vulnerabilities. Moreover, practitioners have little to no contact with (and therefore make no use of) academic research on science communication. We argue that collaboration between science communication researchers and practitioners could benefit the science-public relationship and that communities of practice may be critical to that purpose.

scholarly journals Potentials and Limitations of Educational Videos on YouTube for Science Communication

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Kohler ◽  
Tabea Clara Dietrich
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Final Section ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Media Effect ◽  
The Public ◽  
Learning Platform ◽  
Other Information ◽  
Educational Videos ◽  
Information Materials ◽  
Education Science

YouTube has become a complement learning platform which fosters learning on demand with educational videos. Educational videos are understood as a fruitful strategy to enhance the user’s knowledge and are applied in schools, as well as in science communication, e.g., to inform about climate change. This paper discusses two perspectives which become visible in the current research literature on educational videos on YouTube. First, studies assume that watching educational videos changes the attitude or behavior of the recipients. Second, studies question whether educational videos have a higher impact than other information materials such as texts. We frame both perspectives with regard to theories from media effect studies and learning concepts from education science and discuss their conclusions for educational videos on YouTube. We will first focus on students as a target group for educational videos, but in the further course, we will discuss the results for the public as targeted group of science communication as well. In the final section we will summarize which potentials and limitations educational videos have for educational purposes in science communication.

scholarly journals Tension between visibility and invisibility: Science communication in new information environments

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Metag
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Digital Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
New Information ◽  
Public Engagement With Science ◽  
Understanding Of Science

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.

scholarly journals Scientific Institutions Should Support Inclusive Engagement: Reflections on the AAAS Center for Public Engagement Approach

2022 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elana Kimbrell ◽  
Gemima Philippe ◽  
Mary Catherine Longshore
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
American Association ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Institutions ◽  
Public Engagement With Science ◽  
Training Resources

Scientists’ engagement with society on critical environmental and health issues is essential to reaching positive and equitable long-term outcomes. We argue that stronger institutional support for public engagement is necessary and that inclusive practices should be built into public engagement training and relationships. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)’s Center for Public Engagement with Science and Technology provides a model of support for scientists that we believe other scientific institutions can replicate and expand on. This model prioritizes representative and accessible science communication training, resources (e.g., funding and staff and peer support), opportunities to practice engagement, and rewards and incentives for doing engagement. We describe our programs in each of these areas and reflect on how well each builds scientists’ engagement skills and institutional capacity, and whether each embodies and models thoughtful, accessible, and representative engagement. Through these various approaches, the Center communicates to other scientific institutions that engagement by scientists should be valued, celebrated, and supported, and builds capacity for individual scientists to do effective engagement. We argue that these supports can be applied by other scientific institutions to reflect and incorporate society’s diverse needs and concerns, thus truly serving the public and making science and scientific institutions stronger for it.

scholarly journals Clinical trial registries as Scientometric data: A novel solution for linking and deduplicating clinical trials from multiple registries

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Thiele ◽  
Gerrit Hirschfeld ◽  
Ruth von Brachel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Random Forest ◽  
Random Forest Model ◽  
Scientometric Analysis ◽  
Data Set ◽  
The Public ◽  
Forest Model ◽  
Clinical Trial Registries ◽  
Multiple Primary ◽  
Clinical Trials Registry

AbstractRegistries of clinical trials are a potential source for scientometric analysis of medical research and serve important functions for the research community and the public at large. Clinical trials that recruit patients in Germany are usually registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) or in international registries such as ClinicalTrials.gov. Furthermore, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) aggregates trials from multiple primary registries. We queried the DRKS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the ICTRP for trials with a recruiting location in Germany. Trials that were registered in multiple registries were linked using the primary and secondary identifiers and a Random Forest model based on various similarity metrics. We identified 35,912 trials that were conducted in Germany. The majority of the trials was registered in multiple databases. 32,106 trials were linked using primary IDs, 26 were linked using a Random Forest model, and 10,537 internal duplicates on ICTRP were identified using the Random Forest model after finding pairs with matching primary or secondary IDs. In cross-validation, the Random Forest increased the F1-score from 96.4% to 97.1% compared to a linkage based solely on secondary IDs on a manually labelled data set. 28% of all trials were registered in the German DRKS. 54% of the trials on ClinicalTrials.gov, 43% of the trials on the DRKS and 56% of the trials on the ICTRP were pre-registered. The ratio of pre-registered studies and the ratio of studies that are registered in the DRKS increased over time.

scholarly journals Scientists: Engage the Public!

mBio ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika C. Shugart ◽  
Vincent R. Racaniello
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Social Stigma ◽  
Public Communication ◽  
The Public ◽  
Advanced Society ◽  
The Social

ABSTRACT Scientists must communicate about science with public audiences to promote an understanding of complex issues that we face in our technologically advanced society. Some scientists may be concerned about a social stigma or “Sagan effect” associated with participating in public communication. Recent research in the social sciences indicates that public communication by scientists is not a niche activity but is widely done and can be beneficial to a scientist's career. There are a variety of approaches that scientists can take to become active in science communication.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document