Literature DB >> 20027772

Informing, involving or engaging? Science communication, in the ages of atom-, bio- and nanotechnology.

Monika Kurath1, Priska Gisler.   

Abstract

Science communication has shifted considerably in Europe over the last decades. Three technology controversies on atoms, genes, and nanoscale sciences and nanotechnologies (NST) turned the style of communication from one-way information, participation and dialogues to the idea of an early and more democratic engagement of the public. Analyzing science communication developing over the three controversies, this article shows that what happened in one technology field fed forward to and contributed to shaping the subsequent field and that communication was initiated at a progressively earlier stage of technology development. The article concludes with an empirical analysis of six public engagement projects in NST, saying that the shift towards more democratic engagement of the public hasn't been as profound and complete as has been thought. This is particularly due to the continuing adoption of a simplistic contrast structure that opposes science and the public as two self-contained, antagonistic social entities.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20027772     DOI: 10.1177/0963662509104723

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Underst Sci        ISSN: 0963-6625


  8 in total

1.  When Public Discourse Mirrors Academic Debate: Research Integrity in the Media.

Authors:  Ilaria Ampollini; Massimiano Bucchi
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2019-04-03       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  Science communication as political communication.

Authors:  Dietram A Scheufele
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-09-15       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Fairness in Knowing: Science Communication and Epistemic Justice.

Authors:  Fabien Medvecky
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 3.525

4.  Mismatches between 'scientific' and 'non-scientific' ways of knowing and their contributions to public understanding of science.

Authors:  Anna Mikulak
Journal:  Integr Psychol Behav Sci       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.156

5.  Nanoethics, Science Communication, and a Fourth Model for Public Engagement.

Authors:  Andy Miah
Journal:  Nanoethics       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 0.917

6.  Science to the rescue or contingent progress? Comparing 10 years of public, expert and policy discourses on new and emerging science and technology in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Melanie Smallman
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2017-05-11

7.  Motivation to participate in secondary science communication.

Authors:  Zhichen Hu; Baolong Ma; Rubing Bai
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-09-08

8.  Consensus Statement on Public Involvement and Engagement with Data Intensive Health Research.

Authors:  Mhairi Aitken; Mary P Tully; Carol Porteous; Simon Denegri; Sarah Cunningham-Burley; Natalie Banner; Corri Black; Michael Burgess; Lynsey Cross; Johannes Jm van Delden; Elizabeth Ford; Sarah Fox; Natalie K Fitzpatrick; Kay Gallacher; Catharine Goddard; Lamiece Hassan; Ron Jamieson; Kerina H Jones; Minna Kaarakainen; Fiona Lugg-Widger; Kimberlyn McGrail; Anne McKenzie; Rosalyn Moran; Madeleine J Murtagh; Malcolm Oswald; Alison Paprica; Nicola Perrin; Emma Victoria Richards; John Rouse; Joanne Webb; Donald J Willison
Journal:  Int J Popul Data Sci       Date:  2019-02-12
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.