scholarly journals Neglected spaces in science communication

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (01) ◽  
pp. C01
Author(s):  
Clare Wilkinson
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Science And Technology

Many of the earliest drivers for improved scientific literacy and understanding were based on the assumption that science and technology is all around us, and yet there are some spaces and communities that are neglected in science communication contexts. In this brief comment, Clare Wilkinson introduces a series of ten commentaries, which further probe neglected spaces in science communication.

scholarly journals Using a scientific literacy cluster to determine participant attitudes in scientific events in Japan, and potential applications to improving science communication

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (01) ◽  
pp. A01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shishin Kawamoto ◽  
Minoru Nakayama ◽  
Miki Saijo
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Attitudes Toward Science ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Technology And Society ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Communication Events ◽  
Potential Applications ◽  
Cluster 2

Various science events including Science Cafés have been held in Japan. However, there is the question whether these are events in which all people in society can participate? In particular, methods for checking whether or not the event attracts the participants targeted by the organizers have not yet been well established. In this paper, the authors have designed a simplified questionnaire to identify the participants’ attitudes toward science, technology and society, which can then be grouped into four clusters. When applied to various science cafés, the results revealed that participants consisted of Cluster 1 “Inquisitive  type” and Cluster 2 “Sciencephile” who are interested in science and technology. The cafes studied did not provide sufficient appeal to people of Clusters 3 and  4 who are not interested in science and technology without applying some inventive methods. Our method provides a means of objectivelyevaluating the tendencies of participants in science communication events in order to improve the spread of science communications within society.

scholarly journals Science communication in China: a critical component of the global science powerhouse

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 824-829 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Qiu
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
American Association ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Washington Dc ◽  
Editorial Content ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Beijing China

Abstract China has attached a great significance to bringing science to the public—known as kepu (科普, ‘science popularization’) or kexue chuanbo (科学传播, ‘science dissemination’)—in recent years, partly in response to its unprecedented push for innovation in science and technology. In 2018, it spent 16 billion yuan (US$2.3 billion) on such endeavours, nearly 80% of which was government funding, according to a survey conducted by the Ministry of Science and Technology. With one science-education venue for every million people, approximately 76 million visits were made to the country's 518 general-science museums and 142 million visits were made to 943 museums dedicated to a specific subject matter, such as the Geological Museum of China. In a forum chaired by National Science Review’s executive editor-in-chief, Mu-ming Poo, scientists, journalists and public-information officers discussed the differences in science communication between China and developed nations, the challenges and opportunities of raising scientific literacy in China, how it has played out in a wide range of controversial topics, from stem-cell research to climate change, and the importance of international collaboration. Tao Deng Director of the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Hepeng Jia Science journalist and science-communication scholar at Soochow University, Suzhou, China Brian Lin Director of the Editorial Content Strategy, EurekAlert!, American Association of the Advancement of Science, Washington DC, USA Joy Ma Manager of the Editorial Content, EurekAlert!, American Association of the Advancement of Science, Washington DC, USA Lai Xu Former chief editor of Guokr.com, Beijing, China Shi Yan Deputy director of the China Research Institute for Science Popularisation, Chinese Association of Science and Technology, Beijing, China Mu-ming Poo (Chair) Director of the Insitute of Neuroscience, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China

scholarly journals Issues concerning the science communication ethics of science and technology museums

2021 ◽  
pp. 209660832110262
Author(s):  
Xiang Li ◽  
Xuan Liu ◽  
Huiping Chu
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Scientific Culture ◽  
Communication Ethics ◽  
Ethics Of Science ◽  
Contemporary Science

This paper reviews the acceleration of what is known as the ‘museumization’ process globally in the context of the New Museum Movement, and the particular mission of science and technology museums in representing scientific culture. It analyses the significance of science and technology museums in presenting critical concepts of contemporary science and technology, such as the controversies and uncertainties of science, as well as the diverse subjects that need to be involved in the process of representation, thereby underscoring the complexity of the ethical issues of science communication faced by science and technology museums.

scholarly journals Why Should Scientists be on YouTube? It’s all About Bamboo, Oil and Ice Cream

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric B. Brennan
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Visual Communication ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Ice Cream ◽  
Communication Tools ◽  
The Public ◽  
Communications Skills ◽  
Do It Yourself ◽  
Diverse Groups

Scientific information is a key ingredient needed to tackle global challenges like climate change, but to do this it must be communicated in ways that are accessible to diverse groups, and that go beyond traditional methods (peer-reviewed publications). For decades there have been calls for scientists to improve their communication skills—with each other and the public—but, this problem persists. During this time there have been astonishing changes in the visual communication tools available to scientists. I see video as the next step in this evolution. In this paper I highlight three major changes in the visual communication tools over the past 100 years, and use three memorable items—bamboo, oil and ice cream—and analogies and metaphors to explain why and how Do-it-Yourself (DIY) videos made by scientists, and shared on YouTube, can radically improve science communication and engagement. I also address practical questions for scientists to consider as they learn to make videos, and organize and manage them on YouTube. DIY videos are not a silver bullet that will automatically improve science communication, but they can help scientists to 1) reflect on and improve their communications skills, 2) tell stories about their research with interesting visuals that augment their peer-reviewed papers, 3) efficiently connect with and inspire broad audiences including future scientists, 4) increase scientific literacy, and 5) reduce misinformation. Becoming a scientist videographer or scientist DIY YouTuber can be an enjoyable, creative, worthwhile and fulfilling activity that can enhance many aspects of a scientist’s career.

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.

Enhancing Socioscientific Reasoning Through Nature of Technology

2021 ◽  
pp. 162-190
Author(s):  
Hyunok Lee ◽  
Hyunju Lee
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Socioscientific Issues ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
Essential Component ◽  
Ssr Analysis ◽  
Socioscientific Reasoning ◽  
Nature Of Technology

Fostering informed Socioscientific Reasoning (SSR) is an essential component of developing scientific literacy. In this chapter, the authors suggest that enhancing Nature of Technology (NOT) understanding can be one way to leverage students' informed socioscientific reasoning. The authors describe a proposed NOT conceptual framework with four dimensions and detailed components, and present an analysis of students' reasoning of various socioscientific issues using this framework. Finally, the authors present the finding that NOT components were present in student discussions with varying levels of understanding. The SSR analysis reveals that students with NOT informed understanding can appreciate the integrated characteristics of technology, so as to make sophisticated decisions about science and technology that will change society in fundamental ways, for both better and worse.

Research and Network Opportunities in the Field of Science Communication

2021 ◽  
pp. 180-194
Author(s):  
Rabia Tas
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Target Groups ◽  
International Networks ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Audience Interaction ◽  
Fast Development ◽  
Technological Developments ◽  
Software And Hardware ◽  
The Right

Science and technology have been developing at a great pace. There are numerous breakthrough innovations and groundbreaking improvements in almost every aspect of life. Undoubtedly, another field experiencing such a fast development is communication. Communication has been following and adapting related technological developments not only in terms of software and hardware but also in terms of targeting the right audience and creating the audience interaction. While developments in science and technology feed communication, communication disseminates the outcomes of innovative studies to the defined target groups. Science communication becomes a part of this mutual relation. This study is focused on research funds, opportunities, and international networks in the field of science communication. Within this context, challenges in research activities and expected impact of research outcomes will be examined in terms of science communication. Also, the role and importance of networks in science communication will be examined in line with research funds and support provided for this field.

The Australian Science Centre Movement 1980–2000: Part 1—Questacon, the National Science and Technology Centre

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Bryant ◽  
Mike Gore ◽  
Sue Stocklmayer
Keyword(s):  
Driving Force ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Human Face ◽  
Hands On ◽  
Science Centre ◽  
National Science ◽  
National University ◽  
Australian Science

Part 1: Scholarly concerns over science communication and in particular public attitudes towards and engagement with science have continued for almost half a century, but the establishment of a ‘hands-on' science centre in Canberra in 1980 put practice ahead of theory and led to the building of Questacon—the National Science and Technology Centre in 1988. The driving force behind this development was Australian National University physicist Dr Mike Gore. Funding came from the Australian and Japanese Governments—the latter a bicentennial gift—and a team of ‘explainers' at the centre helped visitors to appreciate that this science centre was not a museum but a place where science had a human face.

scholarly journals Does Controversial Science Call For Public Participation? The Case Of Gmo Skepticism

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-50
Author(s):  
Andreas Christiansen ◽  
Karin Jonch-Clausen ◽  
Klemens Kappel
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Experts ◽  
Policy Making Process

Many instances of new and emerging science and technology are controversial. Although a number of people, including scientific experts, welcome these developments, a considerable skepticism exists among members of the public. The use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is a case in point. In science policy and in science communication, it is widely assumed that such controversial science and technology require public participation in the policy-making process. We examine this view, which we call the Public Participation Paradigm, using the case of GMOs as an example. We suggest that a prominent reason behind the call for public participation is the belief that such participation is required for democratic legitimacy. We then show that the most prominent accounts of democratic legitimacy do not, in fact, entail that public participation is required in cases of controversial science in general, or in the case of GMOs in particular.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document