The “deficit model” of public attitudes towards science has led to controversy over the role of scientific knowledge in explaining lay people’s attitudes towards science. In this paper we challenge the de facto orthodoxy that has connected the deficit model and contextualist perspectives with quantitative and qualitative research methods respectively. We simultaneously test hypotheses from both theoretical approaches using quantitative methodology. The results point to the clear importance of knowledge as a determinant of attitudes toward science. However, in contrast to the rather simplistic
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Patrick SturgisNick Allum
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
This report presents the findings of a two-day invitational workshop held at MIT on September 23–24, 2013 as part of the Evolving Culture of Science Engagement Initiative, an ongoing collaboration between a new nonprofit organization, Culture Kettle, and several MIT departments led by the Program in Science, Technology & Society and the MIT Museum. The initiative explores a new wave of public science engagement activity that appears to be dissolving the once-bright line between science and popular culture.
There is a growing call for greater public involvement in establishing science and technology policy, in line with democratic ideals. A variety of public participation procedures exist that aim to consult and involve the public, ranging from the public hearing to the consensus conference. Unfortunately, a general lack of empirical consideration of the quality of these methods arises from confusion as to the appropriate benchmarks for evaluation. Given that the quality of the output of any participation exercise is difficult to determine, the authors suggest the need to consider which aspects
In the past five years, informal science institutions (ISIs), science communication, advocacy and citizen action groups, funding organizations, and policy-makers in the UK and the USA have become increasingly involved in efforts to promote increased public engagement with science and technology (PEST). Such engagement is described as taking place within the context of a “new mood for dialogue” between scientific and technical experts and the public. Mechanisms to increase PEST have taken a number of forms. One of the most visible features of this shift towards PEST in ISIs is the organization
While theoretical work and empirical research have examined science policy-informing “dialogue events,” dialogue events that do not seek to inform public policy are under-theorized and under-researched, even though they are common and growing in popularity in the UK. We describe how, from a critical perspective, it may initially appear that such events cannot be justified without returning to the deficit model. But with this paper, we seek to open up a discussion about these non policy-informing events by arguing that there are in fact further ways to understand and frame them. We deliberately
In this study, we develop a model of science identity to make sense of the science experiences of 15 successful women of color over the course of their undergraduate and graduate studies in science and into science-related careers. In our view, science identity accounts both for how women make meaning of science experiences and how society structures possible meanings. Primary data included ethnographic interviews during students‘ undergraduate careers, follow-up interviews 6 years later, and ongoing member-checking. Our results highlight the importance of recognition by others for women in
This paper was presented at the 10th International Conference on Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST-10). The authors conducted a survey to lay the groundwork for a national survey to determine the relative importance of science communication to university scientists and engineers, to reveal what factors facilitate or impede communication of science to the non-specialist public on communicating their research, and to provide evidence to substantiate where resources should be targeted and to help develop programming for innovative and effective public engagement.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Susi Sturzenegger-VarvayanisGina EoscoSara BallKelvin LeeMegan HalpernBruce Lewenstein
If the science research and education community is to increase the number and degree of commitment of scientists who participate in public engagement activities, we must understand their perceptions of values, obstacles, and incentives in the science academic environment. This document contains a preliminary distillation of the results of two surveys (2012, 2014) that begins the process of understanding attitudes of science academics and science administrators.
Today, most scientific institutions acknowledge the importance of opening the so-called "ivory tower" of academic research through popularization, industrial innovation or teaching. However, little is known about the actual openness of scientific institutions and how their proclaimed priorities translate into concrete measures. This paper helps getting an idea on the actual practices by studying three key points: the proportion of researchers who are active in dissemination, the academic productivity of these active scientists, and the institutional recognition of their activity in terms of
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Pablo JensenJean-Baptiste RouquierPablo KreimerYves Croissant
This poster about attitudes toward science communication was presented at the American Geophysical Union conference in San Francisco. (Abstract #ED51C-0768)
This article describes the development of the first tool for measuring scientists' written skills in public communication of science. It includes the rationale for establishing learning goals in seven areas: clarity and language, content, knowledge organization, style, analogy, narrative, and dialogue, as well as the questions designed to assess these goals. The skills testing is primarily designed for assessing written communication skills and can be used in many science communication training contexts. It can serve as a baseline survey, a formative assessment, or in summative pretest
This article challenges the assumption that scientists have no experiences with the press. It surveys scientists and concludes that most would welcome contact with journalists.