Currently in Spain, there is a political and social debate over the use and sale of homeopathic products, which is promoted mainly by the skeptical movement. For the first time, this issue has become significant in political discourse. This study analyzes the role that homeopathy-related stories are playing in that political debate. We analyzed the viewpoints of headlines between 2015 and 2017 in eight digital dailies (n = 1,683), which published over 30 stories on homeopathy during the three-year study period. The results indicated that the stance on therapy's lack of scientific evidence
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Lorena Cano-OrónIsabel Mendoza-PoudereuxCarolina Moreno-Castro
Inequalities in scientific knowledge are the subject of increasing attention, so how factual science knowledge is measured, and any inconsistencies in said measurement, is extremely relevant to the field of science communication. Different operationalizations of factual science knowledge are used interchangeably in research, potentially resulting in artificially comparable knowledge levels among respondents. Here, we present data from an experiment embedded in an online survey conducted in the United States (N = 1,530) that examined the distribution of factual science knowledge responses on a
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Meaghan McKasyMichael CacciatoreLeona Yi-Fan SuSara YeoLiane O’Neill
In this comment, we focus on the ways power impacts science communication collaborations. Following Fischhoff's suggestion of focusing on internal consultation within science communication activities, we examine the ways such consultation is complicated by existing power structures, which tend to prioritize scientific knowledge over other knowledge forms. This prioritization works in concert with funding structures and with existing cultural and social hierarchies to shape science communication in troubling ways. We discuss several strategies to address problematic power structures. These
We explore and discuss the diverse motives that drive science communication, pointing out that political motives are the major driving force behind most science communication programmes including so-called public engagement with science with the result that educational and promotional objectives are blurred and science communication activities are rarely evaluated meaningfully. Since this conflation of motives of science communication and the gap between political rhetoric and science communication practice could threaten the credibility of science, we argue for the restoration of a crucial
Today, science and politics are in a complex status of reciprocal dependency. Politics is dependent on scientific expertise in order to adequately address highly complex social problems, and science is fundamentally dependent on public funding and on political regulation. Taken together, the diverse interactions, interrelations and interdependencies of science and politics create a heterogenous and complex patchwork — namely, the science-policy interface. The societal relevance for phenomena such as scientific policy advice, science governance or (politically fostered) science communication
Science Hunters is an outreach project which employs the computer game Minecraft to engage children with scientific learning and research through school visits, events, and extracurricular clubs. We principally target children who may experience barriers to accessing Higher Education, including low socioeconomic status, being the first in their family to attend university, and disability (including Special Educational Needs). The Minecraft platform encourages teamwork and makes science learning accessible and entertaining for children, irrespective of background. We employ a flexible approach
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Laura HobbsCarly StevensJackie HartleyCalum Hartley
A timely arrival in the academic literature on science communication through online video, this book reports on the results of a major international project that has explored in depth this emerging field of research.
This study uses the online discourse surrounding an Austrian publicly-funded study about “Islamic kindergartens” as a case study to approach communication about the social sciences in the online public sphere. Results from a discourse analysis of 937 user comments in online forums of two Austrian daily newspapers show that the social sciences are often referred to as a “special case”. While some use this argument to neglect its societal relevance, others use it to highlight its role as societal problem solver. Moreover, users discuss characteristics of “true” social scientists and scrutinise
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Brigitte HuberIrmgard WetzsteinIngrid Aichberger
Scholars continue to search for solutions to shift climate change skeptics’ views on climate science and policy. However, research has shown that certain audiences are resistant to change regarding environmental issues. To explore this issue further, we examine the presence of reactance among different audiences in response to simple, yet prominently used, climate change messages. Our results show that emphasizing the scientific consensus of climate change produces reactance, but only among people who question the existence of climate change. Moreover, adding political identification to the
In a recent article, Ma, Dixon, and Hmielowski (2019. Psychological Reactance from Reading Basic Facts on Climate Change: The Role of Prior Views and Political Identification. Environmental Communication, 13(1), 71-86) explore whether scientific consensus messages activate psychological reactance. They find no main effect of the consensus message on psychological reactance, but a subsequent moderation analysis appears to show reactance among audiences who question the existence of climate change, especially Republicans. Here we attempt to replicate this finding in a large national sample of
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Sander van der LindenEdward MaibachAnthony Leiserowitz
This RAPID was submitted in response to the NSF Dear Colleague letter related to the COVID-19 pandemic. This award is made by the AISL program in the Division of Research on Learning, using funds from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. The major public policy of social distancing relies, in part, on the cooperation of younger and healthier people who may not experience symptoms and can spread the virus unknowingly to more vulnerable populations. Science journalists, who are on the front lines of covering the pandemic, can play an important role in educating millennial audiences about the science behind the virus, how it is transmitted and effective ways to prevent the virus from spreading. This award will help the STEM field better understand how to engage millennial audiences with effective COVID-19 media content and to urgently capture professional knowledge on crisis reporting. KQED and Texas Tech University are suited to rapidly implement a science media informal science learning project targeting millennials and younger audiences in light of their current NSF-funded "Cracking the Code: Influencing Millennial Science Engagement" collaborative research and evaluation project (DRL 1810990 and 1811091). The project team has built a functional research protocol for its media practitioner and academic researcher collaboration, and will apply these new RAPID funds to complement on-going efforts, mobilize the existing team, research protocol, and research tools to respond to the communication challenge of reaching younger adults posed by COVID-19. Content to be created includes: 1) Radio broadcasts - daily news coverage, live talks; 2) A real-time blog - live Coronavirus updates and 3) Social media content on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.
The project team will explore the following research questions:
How could COVID-19 coverage be designed to best inform, engage and educate millennials and younger audiences about the science of virus transmission and prevention?
What are some best practices for crisis reporting, as journalists respond to both constantly updated information and changing audience needs, that can be used by media outlets (such as advisors PBS Digital Studios, PBS NewsHour, NOVA, NPR Science, and more)?
The research protocol centers around "media testing cycles," which are time-bounded studies (5 months long) exploring a subset of research questions about the effectiveness of KQED's science content (articles, videos, social media posts and radio reporting) at reaching younger audiences. Steps include identifying problems that are suited for empirical examination; formulating plausible competing hypotheses on the nature of those problems and their potential solutions; and crafting study designs calculated to support valid, realistic inferences on the relative strength of those hypotheses. Data will be gathered from COVID-19 audience "chatter" from Twitter and Facebook through Crimson Hexagon, a social media listening platform. In addition to the social media listening, researchers will conduct a thematic analysis of the questions currently being collected through the audience engagement platform Hearken, where KQED has gathered nearly 2,000 questions to date about the virus and lifestyle changes. This data will also help the project team understand knowledge gaps about prevention and transmission of the virus. These two qualitative studies will be conducted concurrently and reported to KQED journalists quickly to inform reporting.
Texas Tech researchers will create a virus transmission and prevention knowledge assessment. This assessment will be validated using a national online survey. The project will examine knowledge differences based on, for example, generation and gender. TTU will examine relationships between performance on this assessment and two relevant measures: science curiosity and ordinary science intelligence. The national survey will help identify what knowledge gaps are present in which audiences. Using this information, KQED journalists will develop "explainers" and other news content, to meet audience needs and to fill knowledge gaps.
This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.
This RAPID was submitted in response to the NSF Dear Colleague letter related to the COVID-19 pandemic. This award is made by the AISL program in the Division of Research on Learning, using funds from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. COVID-19 presents a national threat to the health of children and families, presenting serious implications for the mental and physical health of children. Child development scientists have already warned of increasing stress levels among the U.S. child population, especially those in low-income families of color. In addition, Latino children are disproportionately impoverished, and benefit from culturally relevant information. Parents and caregivers need to be armed with effective science-based strategies to improve child prospects during this global crisis. Harnessing well-established partnership (including with local TV news partners and parent-serving organizations) strengthens the potential for broad impacts on the health and well-being of children and families during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the pandemic persists, widely disseminating accurate research-based strategies to support parents and families, with a focus on low-income Latino parents, is crucial to meeting the needs of the nation's most vulnerable during this global crisis. The award addresses this urgent need by producing research-based news videos on child development for distribution on broadcast television stations that reach low income Latino parents. The videos will communicate research-based recommendations regarding COVID-19 in ways that are relatable to Latino parents and lead to positive parenting during this pandemic. A "how to" video will also be produced showing parents how to implement some of the practices. Project partners include Abriendo Puertas, the largest U.S. parenting program serving low-income Latinos, and Ivanhoe Broadcasting.
Research questions include: 1) What information do parents need (and potentially what misinformation they are being exposed to)? 2) What are they sharing? 3) How does this vary geographically? 4) Can researchers detect differences in public engagement in geographic areas where TV stations air news videos as compared to areas that don't? This project will use data and communication science research strategies (e.g. natural language processing from online sites where parents are asking questions and sharing information) to inform the content of the videos and lead to the adoption of featured behaviors. Data from web searches, public Facebook pages, and Twitter posts will be used to gain a window into parents' main questions and concerns including information regarding hygiene, how to talk about the pandemic without frightening their children, or determining veracity of what they hear and see related to the pandemic.
This organic approach can detect concerns that parents may be unlikely to ask doctors or discuss in focus groups. Methodologically, the researchers will accomplish this by natural language analysis of the topics that parents raise; the words and phrases they use to talk about specific content; and any references to external sources of information. Where possible, the researchers will segment this analysis by geography to see if there are geographical differences in information needs and discourse. A research brief will share new knowledge gained with the field on how to respond to national emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, using local TV news and reinforcement of messages across contexts. The findings from this award will provide a knowledge base that can be utilized to better inform responses to national emergencies in the future. By broadly disseminating these findings through a research brief, the project?s innovative research will advance the field of communication science.
This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.