scholarly journals Epistemology, Structure and Urgency: The Sociology of Financial and Scientific Journalists

2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 86-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoff Cooper ◽  
Mary Ebeling
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
General Applicability ◽  
Complex Technology ◽  
The Media ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Social Scientific

This paper, which examines the work of journalists in one field, argues for the value of including journalists’ own understandings and practices in analyses of the role of the media. Moreover it suggests that, in this field, there may be more commonalities between the practices of journalism and social science than is commonly supposed. The paper is based upon a set of interviews with scientific and financial journalists, covering their interpretations of nanotechnologies and their development. Whereas much of the social scientific work to date in this area has been concerned with the public understanding of science, and the role that journalism plays in relation to this, our study addresses the parallel issue of how, in a field characterised by high levels of commercialisation, potential investors get information and make judgments about particular applications, and the extent to which journalism plays a key role in this process. Here, we focus not primarily on the ways in which the media frame understandings of a complex technology, important though they may be, but on the practical epistemological strategies that journalists employ to make sense of it. We argue that journalists can be seen to be engaged in epistemological strategies that are analogous to those of sociologists, and that this dimension is too easily missed by approaches that, for example, recommend that the correct unit of analysis should always be journalism rather than journalists. We conclude by suggesting that, whilst the general applicability of our argument to other fields of journalism is necessarily an empirical question, our approach may have more general significance for debates about the critical role of social science.

Should You Be a Public Scientist?

2021 ◽  
pp. 375-380
Author(s):  
Dennis Meredith
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Resource Depletion ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
The Public ◽  
It Impacts ◽  
Global Problems ◽  
The Media ◽  
Understanding Of Science

Deciding whether to be a “public scientist”—using the media spotlight to highlight important issues—means deciding whether one is a natural explainer. Also, it must be decided how much time and effort can be committed to such outreach and how it impacts research and other activities. Explaining research does offer satisfactions, in that the researcher is contributing to public understanding of science. One problem is that the coverage of science and technology is small and shrinking. That said, opportunities to reach the public directly through websites and social media are considerable. The role of public scientists and the importance of explaining research in general are becoming ever more critical because failure to bridge the information gulf between researchers and the public will hamper, perhaps tragically, our ability to solve the massive global problems we face—climate change, resource depletion, ecological damage, food security, and disease.

The Use of Case Studies in Law and Social Science Research

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 381-396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa L. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Case Study Research ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Social Scientific

This article reviews classic and contemporary case study research in law and social science. Taking as its starting point that legal scholars engaged in case studies generally have a set of questions distinct from those using other research approaches, the essay offers a detailed discussion of three primary contributions of case studies in legal scholarship: theory building, concept formation, and processes/mechanisms. The essay describes the role of case studies in social scientific work and their express value to legal scholars, and offers specific descriptions from classic and contemporary works.

The roles of rhetoric in the public understanding of science

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan G. Gross
Keyword(s):  
Rhetorical Analysis ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Minor Role ◽  
Contextual Model ◽  
Deficit Model ◽  
The Public ◽  
Science Rhetoric ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Social Scientific

In the public understanding of science, rhetoric has two distinct roles: it is both a theory capable of analysing public understanding and an activity capable of creating it. In its analytical role, rhetoric reveals two dominant models of public understanding: the deficit model and the contextual model. In the deficit model, rhetoric acts in the minor role of creating public understanding by accommodating the facts and methods of science to public needs and limitations. In the contextual model, rhetoric and rhetorical analysis play major roles. Rhetorical analysis provides an independent source of evidence to secure social scientific claims; in addition, it supplies the grounds for a rhetoric of reconstruction, one that reconstitutes the fact and facts of science in the public interest.

Deliberation in Communication Studies

2018 ◽  
pp. 501-517
Author(s):  
John Gastil ◽  
Laura Black
Keyword(s):  
Critical Role ◽  
Ancient Greece ◽  
Communication Studies ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
The Public ◽  
Contemporary Work ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
The Public Sphere

The discipline of communication encompasses a broad spectrum of humanistic, interpretive, and social scientific approaches to studying public deliberation. Early work engaged Habermasian theories of the public sphere, and rhetorical scholarship has foregrounded the deliberative threads running back to the discipline’s earliest history in ancient Greece. The bulk of contemporary work, however, has examined the dynamics of deliberation, particularly in the context of face-to-face discussions and dialogues in small groups. These studies have revealed the importance of narrative and dialogic exchanges during deliberation, as well as the critical role of facilitation and the maintenance of deliberative norms. Research has also assessed the practical consequences of participating in deliberation. The discipline’s practical orientation has led some scholars to seek ways to optimize deliberative designs to maximize simultaneously the quality of their decision outputs and their civic impacts on participants.

‘Who Wants to be a Social Engineer? A commentary on David Blunkett's Speech to the ESRC’

2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Hodgkinson
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Politics And Government ◽  
The Government ◽  
Education And Employment ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
The Uk

This article is a response to a speech addressed to the Economic and Social Research Council which was made, in February this year, by the UK Secretary of State for Education and Employment, David Blunkett. The speech was entitled ‘Influence or Irrelevance: can social science improve government?’ . Blunkett's programme for engaging social science in the policy process is far from unique and many of the arguments have been heard before. However, the curiosity of the speech lies in the fact that the conception of social science which Blunkett advocates mirrors the approach New Labour itself has to politics and government. This raises some rather interesting difficulties for social scientists. How do we engage in a debate about the role of social scientific research in the policy process when our own conception of the discipline may be radically at odds with that of the government? Furthermore, New Labour's particular conception of the relationship between social and policy-making means that we not only have to contest their notion of what it is we do, but also challenge their conception of the policy process. We cannot ignore this engagement, even if we wanted to. The challenge is to address it and to do so, moreover, in terms which Blunkett might understand. This article is an attempt to start this process.

Od publicznego rozumienia nauki do komunikacji naukowej. Uwarunkowania rozwoju komunikacji naukowej w Polsce

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (15) ◽  
pp. 33-50
Author(s):  
Sylwia Mrozowska
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Development Strategy ◽  
Scientific Communication ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Scientific Policy ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Higher Education System ◽  
Understanding Of Science

This article is devoted to selected aspects of scientific communication in Poland. Its aim is to draw attention to the role of scientific communication in public understanding of science and to indicate the most important determinants of the development of scientific communication in Poland. It is assumed in the article that scientific communication and the popularization of research results are activities undertaken by scientists, science units and entities acting for the benefit of science in specific systemic, financial, legal or political conditions. Therefore, in order to assess the determinants of the development of scientific communication in a given country it is necessary, first of all, to get know the conditions in which it takes place. An institutional-legal analysis was used to prove this thesis. In the first, descriptive part of the article the history of the development of public understanding of science and its relationship with the development of scientific communication are mentioned, the second, research part refers to the results of the analysis of basic legal acts and available data in the scope of: the place and role of scientific communication in Polish scientific policy, including the present state of the higher education system and the solutions proposed in the reform of higher education prepared by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education; the place and role of popularization of research results in the development strategy of a scientific unit on the example of the University of Gdańsk and university/researcher's obligations in the field of scientific communication towards research funding institutions.

scholarly journals The Croonian Lecture 2004 Risk: food, fact and fantasy

2005 ◽  
Vol 360 (1458) ◽  
pp. 1133-1144 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R Krebs
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Government Policy ◽  
Food Poisoning ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Spongiform Encephalopathy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
The Individual

We all take risks, but most of the time we do not notice them. We are generally bad at judging the risks we take, and in the end, for some of us, this will prove fatal. Eating, like everything else in life, is not risk free. Is that next mouthful pure pleasure, or will it give you food poisoning? Will it clog your arteries as well as filling your stomach? This lecture weaves together three strands—the public understanding of science, the perception of risk and the role of science in informing government policy—as it explains how food risks are assessed and managed by government and explores the boundaries between the responsibilities of the individual and the regulator. In doing so, it draws upon the science of risk assessment as well as our attitudes to risk in relation to issues such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, dioxins in salmon and diet and obesity.

What do we know about “don't knows”? Or, contexts of “ignorance”

1996 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Turner ◽  
Mike Michael
Keyword(s):  
The Self ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Late Modernity ◽  
The Public ◽  
Political Statement ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Don't Know Responses

This paper addresses the meanings of “ignorance” in the context of “don't know” responses to questionnaires. First, we consider some of the broader functions of questionnaires, suggesting that they reflect and mediate between particular types of institutions, respondents and society. We then unpack some of the meanings of “don't know” responses. Specifically, we argue that the “don't know” response is not merely a sign of deficit but, potentially, a potent political statement. Moreover, in relation to studies of the public understanding of science, it can be employed as a resource by people reflexively to express their identity through their relationship with science. Next we consider ignorance in the more expansive contexts of late modernity, which include concerns about the ambivalent role of science in general, the transgressive quality of biotechnology in particular and the impetus to narrate the self. Consideration of these factors, we argue, may be useful for further interrogation of the meanings of “don't know” responses.

scholarly journals Becoming a Nurse Scientist: The Critical Role of Mentorship, Collaboration, and Foundational Experiences as a Graduate Student

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shelley Doucet
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Graduate Student ◽  
Undergraduate Student ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Collaborative Networks

This article is a narrative of my journey to becoming a nurse scientist, which began as an undergraduate student in nursing. Throughout this paper, I share the ingredients that have been critical to my success as a new scientist, how my past and present perceptions of the role of a scientist have evolved, and the personal benefits I have experienced in this role. I conclude with a summary of how I perceive the scientific work that I do contributes to knowledge and society. Overall, my mentors, collaborative networks, and foundational experiences as a graduate student have laid the foundation for my career as a new scientist and have prepared me to conduct multi-method intersectoral research, which I believe is critical to informing health policy.

scholarly journals Is art a "good" mediator in a Science Festival?

2007 ◽  
Vol 06 (03) ◽  
pp. A02 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabienne Crettaz von Roten ◽  
Olivier Moeschler
Keyword(s):  
Public Understanding ◽  
Science And Society ◽  
The Public ◽  
Complex Relation ◽  
Science Society ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Special Case ◽  
Shed Light

This paper relates to a special case of science-society mediation set up during the Science et Cité festival 2005. This national event took place in about twenty cities in Switzerland to promote a closer cooperation between science and society via art (theatre, music, dance, exhibitions, cinema, etc.), in order to reach the population at large. Results on the profile of the public, the role played by the cultural institutions involved, the motives of the visitors and the role of art in the science-society dialogue show that the goals aimed at by the festival's organisers were only partially reached. Moreover, the analyses shed light on the complex relation between art, science and society in public understanding of science activities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document