scholarly journals La investigación responsable en los estudios de audiencia y recepción

Author(s):  
Mónica Figueras-Maz ◽  
Gema Revuelta

La investigación responsable incluye, más allá de la ética en el contenido y el proceso, la implicación de múltiples actores y público, un acceso más fácil a los resultados científicos, la perspectiva de género, y la educación científica. El movimiento RRI (Responsible Research and Innovation) pretende que la investigación e innovación estén orientadas a conseguir resultados sostenibles, éticamente aceptables y socialmente deseables y que todo el proceso y las prácticas que comportan la investigación e innovación estén alineados con los valores, las necesidades y las expectativas de la sociedad. La investigación en comunicación, y específicamente, en audiencias y recepción, no se escapa de esta tendencia. En esta nueva concepción, se da un paso adelante respecto a la ética y se atribuye la responsabilidad no sólo al investigador sino que se avanza hacia el concepto de corresponsabilidad. En definitiva, con el impulso inicial de la Comisión Europea, se aboga por una investigación inclusiva y sostenible. Este artículo pretende, por un lado, plantear un breve repaso a la evolución y actualidad de los estudios de audiencia y recepción desde la perspectiva de las rupturas epistemológicas vividas y de los distintos retos a los que se enfrenta (conceptuales, metodológicos y éticos) y, por otro, entender el origen, evolución y tendencias del concepto de RRI para, finalmente, ver cómo puede aplicarse al estudio de la audiencia y recepción. El artículo tiene la vocación de convertirse en un texto que pueda ayudar a los investigadores del campo de la comunicación, y específicamente de las audiencias, a reflexionar sobre cómo poder incorporar la RRI a su trabajo.Responsible research includes, beyond ethics in the content and process, engagement of multiple actors and the public, access to scientific results, gender perspective, and scientific education. The RRI (Responsible Research and Innovation) movement aims to create a society where research and innovation practices are oriented towards achieving sustainable, ethically acceptable and socially desirable results related to the values, needs and expectations of society. Research in communication, and specifically in audiences and reception, does not escape this trend. In this new conception, a step forward with respect to ethics is taken and the responsibility is attributed not only to the researcher but also to the concept of co-responsibility. In short, with the initial impulse of the European Commission, an inclusive and sustainable research is advocated. This article intends, on the one hand, to present a brief review of the evolution and actuality of audience and reception studies from the perspective of the epistemological ruptures experienced and the different challenges it faces (conceptual, methodological and ethical) and, on the other hand, to understand the origin, evolution and trends of the concept of RRI and, finally, to see how it can be applied to the study of the audience and reception. The article has the vocation to become a text that can help researchers in this field to reflect on how to incorporate the RRI into their work.

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 360-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malene Vinther Christensen ◽  
Mika Nieminen ◽  
Marlene Altenhofer ◽  
Elise Tancoigne ◽  
Niels Mejlgaard ◽  
...  

Abstract After a decade of efforts to mainstream Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) across Europe, the policy momentum is now uncertain. We explore how 217 organisations perceive responsibility in relation to their work, what mechanisms they apply to promote responsible practices, and what hindrances to promoting RRI they observe. Most organisations are unfamiliar with RRI but employ diverse perceptions of responsibility and mechanisms to promote it nonetheless. Civil society organisations are primarily outward oriented; collaborating with others and hosting science events. Private companies are more internally focussed and more likely to formalise this effort in strategies and internal guidelines. Universities resemble private companies, while private and public funders use funding-specific tools to incentivise responsible practices. Our results suggest that RRI is still poorly institutionalised and that some areas lack attention among actors in the research and innovation systems. Future policy endeavours might benefit from addressing deficits and tapping into existing perceptions of responsibility.


2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annapurna Mamidipudi ◽  
Nina Frahm

This article aims to reflect on the role of Science, Technology and Society (STS) research(ers) in co-constructing Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in the Global South. By reporting on RRI research in the Global South, here the Indo-Dutch NWO-MVI project on rice straw burning in Punjab, we make an argument for approaching RRI as a symmetric process of knowledge production mobilised by local actors and researchers alike. For STS researchers to responsibly engage with local innovation systems, their activities need to go beyond knowledge provision and towards facilitating the ownership and circulation of local meanings and means to responsibly innovate. Rather than understanding RRI as a fixed framework to govern innovation practices, this article reflects on RRI as an approach that combines research with intervention. We propose that following the principle of symmetry can turn RRI into a productive tool for the mobilisation of embedded local principles that can organise innovation systems in a responsible way. In particular, symmetry allows the re-location of meanings and practices of innovation as well as the re-negotiation of multiple notions of responsible governance.


Author(s):  
Malene Vinther Christensen ◽  
Mika Nieminen ◽  
Marlene Altenhofer ◽  
Elise Tangcoigne ◽  
Niels Mejlgaard ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Michiel van Oudheusden

This chapter sets out the meanings attached to the concept of ‘innovation’ and asks how it has recently come to occupy the political and economic position it now holds. Drawing from science and technology studies, which has long sought to better incorporate the public in technological decision-making, it explores the impetus towards connecting ‘responsibility’ with ‘innovation’ and the context from which this derives. Finally, it examines how this impetus has become incorporated into various frameworks for Responsible (Research and) Innovation, and what is missing from this approach in terms of understanding the place of ‘innovation’ in the present political economy, and the place of politics in innovation.


2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 1145-1155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron Blonder ◽  
Esty Zemler ◽  
Sherman Rosenfeld

Responsible research and innovation (RRI) stands at the center of several EU projects and represents a contemporary view of the connection between science and society. The goal of RRI is to create a shared understanding of the appropriate behaviors of governments, business and NGOs which are central to building trust and confidence of the public and other stakeholders in research and innovation. In this paper we describe a 4.5 hour lesson, “The Story of Lead,” which was developed for teaching RRI to high school chemistry students, based on the historical story of lead. The lesson is part of a larger module. The lesson connects the chemistry curriculum, related to the scientific aspects of lead, to the 6 RRI dimensions. We describe the progression of the lesson, provide relevant links and teaching materials, and present responses of teachers, after they tried out the lesson. The RRI dimensions are compared to prior work done in the field of Socioscientific Issues (SSI). Based on this evidence, we suggest that the lesson can be a good introduction to the topic of RRI in chemistry classrooms.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (03) ◽  
pp. C04 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Braun ◽  
Erich Griessler

For decades the idea that scientists, policy makers and industry know best in research and innovation has been convincingly challenged. The concept of Responsible Research and Innovation [RRI] combines various strands of critique and takes up the idea that research and innovation need to be democratized and must engage with the public in order to serve the public. The proposed future EU research funding framework programme, Horizon Europe, excludes a specific program line on research in RRI. We propose a number of steps the European Parliament should take to institutionalize RRI in Horizon Europe and beyond.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document