In this article, we follow up on food scientists' findings that people judge new food technologies and related products (un)favourably immediately after just hearing the name of the technology. From the reactions, it appears that people use their attitudes to technologies they know to evaluate new technologies. Using categorization theory, in this study we have found that, by triggering associations with a familiar technology, a name of the new technology can be enough to determine emerging attitudes. Comparison between the technology used for categorization and another familiar technology had
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Reginald BoersmaP. Marijn PoortvlietBart Gremmen
In November 2020, President-elect Joe Biden identified four priority areas for the incoming administration: COVID-19; climate change, economic recovery, and racial equity. These crucial areas of national interest will be the focus of media attention, policy debates, funding initiatives, and community discussions over the next four years. Will museums be part of these important conversations and initiatives? Are there opportunities for museums to affirm or to reposition their roles within the difficult public deliberations ahead? Addressing Societal Challenges through STEM (ASCs) is a research
Advances in 21st century genetic technologies offer new directions for addressing public health and environmental challenges, yet raise important social and ethical questions. Though the need for inclusive deliberation is widely recognized, institutionalized risk definitions, regulation standards, and imaginations of publics pose obstacles to democratic participation and engagement. This paper traces how the problematic precedents set by the 1975 Asilomar Conference emerge in contemporary discussions on CRISPR, and draws from a recent controversy surrounding field trial releases of genetically
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
The primary objective of this study is to document how people learn the science of the COVID-19 pandemic in real time, how they activate this scientific knowledge towards informed decision making, and how these processes change over time. This study is intended to produce additional insights on how such learning is shaped by equity concerns and contextual factors. For example, researchers will document how the ways in which people learn the science of COVID-19 are mediated by the sources of information they have access to and leverage, as well as what supports them in doing so. The research will further document how people leverage their understandings of COVID-19, alongside other forms of knowledge and concerns in their decision-making. This study may serve a crucial role in aiding the public understanding of where structural points of informational failure might occur. It may also reveal where and how the public engages or resists community action strategies to mitigate spread and suffering through when, how and why they gather, share, and make sense of scientific data. 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 and ECR programs in the Division of Research on Learning, using funds from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.
This research will draw upon a conceptual framework of consequential learning and a methodological framework of narrative inquiry. Sixty participants in Lansing, Michigan and Seattle, Washington will participate over the course of one year in cyclical interviews, focus group conversations and experience sampling approaches. Documents and resources named and used by the participants in their learning will be collected and analyzed. Attention will be paid to science learning in the following areas as the primary focus: a) the science of SARS-CoV-2 and the relationship between virus and disease, b) viral transmission, and c) origination, replication and spread. A key focus will also be how people use scientific data and evidence-based explanations when developing understandings and making decisions with respect to the pandemic. This research is urgent and timely because the COVID-19 pandemic is projected to occur in multiple waves over approximately 18 months. Insights may produce basic understanding about rapid science learning, policy strategies, school-based practices and resources for use within current and future waves. Socioscientific crises differentially impact people, with effects felt more significantly by vulnerable people. Thus, this study will address the urgent call for investigation into factors and experiences of low-income individuals and families who are trying to educate themselves on continually changing data during an international health crisis.
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. The public must be made aware in a clear, responsible way about the role of science to help bring this pandemic under control and prevent future outbreaks. This project will allow the NewsHour to go beyond their daily reporting of the medical information about the pandemic, to inform the public about the difference scientific research/ research conducted by scientists and medical professionals can make in attacking such a dire threat. The PBS NewsHour has the capability to quickly mobilize its science journalists and national distribution infrastructure to produce at least six broadcast segments and additional digital materials reporting on this on-going scientific work. They will interview scientists, researchers and experts in genomic analysis, computer tracking, vaccine production, and social epidemiology showing what they are doing to test, treat, track and stop the spread of COVID-19, to create vaccines that may prevent further transmission, and to measure the social impact of the disease. These segments will be broadcast nationwide on local PBS stations and distributed on their website, YouTube, and social media channels. Viewership of the NewsHour is extensive reaching 2.5 million people nightly via broadcast and almost 33 million YouTube views per quarter. During a recent quarter, they reached 72.6 million on Facebook and garnered 86.8 million Twitter impressions.
The research team, Knology, will conduct a study to assess 1) where US adults are primarily getting information about COVID-19; 2) their perception of personal and public responsibility; 3) behaviors they have taken and/or plan to take, and when; 4) their social values. Knology will develop a survey instrument with adopted items and modules used in prior collaborations to develop a baseline understanding of the relationship between news consumption and attitudes about COVID-19 risk. The survey will be hosted using Qualtrics. Survey data will be gathered from a representative sample of US adults (N = 1000) recruited using the online software system, Prolific. A recent PBS NewsHour/NPR/Marist poll will be used as a baseline. Once potentially identifying information like demographics are aggregated, these formative data and topline results will be shared openly through the Knology website to support other researchers and journalists.
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.
COVID-19 has put science in a tricky spot. The good news, as National Academy of Sciences President Marcia McNutt explains, is that scientific expertise is back in high demand: “When the chips are down and everything is on the line and you can be the next person in the hospital bed, it’s the experts that you want to listen to.” But there’s a serious potential downside for science in having the public’s ear: today’s high-profile expert assertions can be disproven by tomorrow’s events. For example, if public health interventions such as social distancing are effective, COVID-19-related deaths in
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Dietram ScheufeleNicole KrauseIsabelle FreilingDominique Brossard
Health is a personal experience, a social issue and a global concern. Any attempt to improve health, whether through new treatments, policies or procedures, will be most effective when patients and the public are engaged. No matter how great your idea or how robust your science, it still has to be accepted by the people who stand to benefit from it. Most of the time, that will mean someone putting their trust in healthcare professionals and the science and technologies that underpin modern medicine. Wellcome Global Monitor is the largest study to date into global attitudes to science and
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Simon ChaplinImran KhanHilary LeeversPhilomena GibbonsLara ClementsEthan GreenwoodHannah SkiltonHannah FranklinAndrew RzelpaHania FarhanAndrew DuganPablo Diego-RosellSteve CrabtreeJulie RayPriscilla StandridgeZaac Ritter
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
Although cooperative, interorganizational networks have become a common mechanism for delivery of public services, evaluating their effectiveness is extremely complex and has generally been neglected. To help resolve this problem, we discuss the evaluation of networks of community-based, mostly publicly funded health, human service, and public welfare organizations. Consistent with pressures to perform effectively from a broad range of key stakeholders, we argue that networks must be evaluated at three levels of analysis: community, network, and organization/participant levels. While the three
In 2015, the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (SITC) received a two-year NSF-AISL Pathways Grant (#1516742) entitled “Developing an Informal Environmental Health Education Model in Tribal Communities,” designed to develop a process model and curriculum for community-based environmental health outreach, grounded in cultural values and practices. The project deliverables included a curriculum and guiding document, intended to inform and inspire other tribal communities wishing to create a culture-based environmental or public health curriculum.
SITC contracted the Lifelong Learning Group
In the United States, broad study in an array of different disciplines —arts, humanities, science, mathematics, engineering— as well as an in-depth study within a special area of interest, have been defining characteristics of a higher education. But over time, in-depth study in a major discipline has come to dominate the curricula at many institutions. This evolution of the curriculum has been driven, in part, by increasing specialization in the academic disciplines. There is little doubt that disciplinary specialization has helped produce many of the achievement of the past century
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
David SkortonAshley BearNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
resourceprojectProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
This NSF INCUDES Design and Development Launch Pilot will increase the recruitment, retention, and matriculation of racial and ethnic minorities in STEM Ph.D. programs contributing to hazards and disaster research. Increasing STEM focused minorities on hazards mitigation, and disaster research areas will benefit society and contribute to the achievements of specific, desired societal outcomes following disasters. The Minority SURGE Capacity in Disasters (SURGE) launch pilot will provide the empirical research to identify substantial ways to increase the underrepresentation of minorities in STEM disciplines interested in hazards mitigation and disaster research. Increasing the involvement of qualified minorities will help solve the broader vulnerability concerns in these communities and help advance the body of knowledge through the diversity of thought and creative problem solving in scholarship and practice. Utilizing workshops and a multifaceted mentorship program SURGE creates a new model that addresses the diversity concerns in both STEM and disaster fields, and make American communities more resilient following natural disasters. This project will be of interest to policymakers, educators and the general public.
The Minority SURGE Capacity in Disasters (SURGE) NSF INCLUDES Design and Development Launch Pilot will enhance the social capital of racial and ethnic minority communities by increasing their networks, connections, and access to disaster management decision-making among members of their community from STEM fields. The four-fold goals of SURGE are to: (1) increase the number of minority graduate researchers in STEM fields with a disaster focus; (2) develop and guide well-trained, qualified disaster scholars from STEM fields; (3) provide academic and professional mentorship for next generation minority STEM scholars in hazards mitigation and disaster research; and (4) develop professional and research opportunities that involve outreach and problem solving for vulnerable communities in the U.S. The SURGE project is organized as a lead-organization network through the University of Nebraska at Omaha and includes community partners. As a pilot project, SURGE participation is limited to graduate students from research-intensive universities across the country. Each student will attend workshops and training programs developed by the project leads. SURGE investigators will conduct project evaluation and assessment of their workshops, training, and mentorship projects. Results from evaluations and assessments will be presented at STEM and disaster-related conferences and published in peer-reviewed academic journals.
DATE:
-
TEAM MEMBERS:
DeeDee BennettLori PeekTerri NortonHans Louis-Charles