Literature DB >> 23940312

Gap between science and media revisited: scientists as public communicators.

Hans Peter Peters1.   

Abstract

The present article presents an up-to-date account of the current media relations of scientists, based on a comprehensive analysis of relevant surveys. The evidence suggests that most scientists consider visibility in the media important and responding to journalists a professional duty--an attitude that is reinforced by universities and other science organizations. Scientific communities continue to regulate media contacts with their members by certain norms that compete with the motivating and regulating influences of public information departments. Most scientists assume a two-arena model with a gap between the arenas of internal scientific and public communication. They want to meet the public in the public arena, not in the arena of internal scientific communication. Despite obvious changes in science and in the media system, the orientations of scientists toward the media, as well as the patterns of interaction with journalists, have their roots in the early 1980s. Although there is more influence on public communication from the science organizations and more emphasis on strategic considerations today, the available data do not indicate abrupt changes in communication practices or in the relevant beliefs and attitudes of scientists in the past 30 y. Changes in the science-media interface may be expected from the ongoing structural transformation of the public communication system. However, as yet, there is little evidence of an erosion of the dominant orientation toward the public and public communication within the younger generation of scientists.

Keywords:  mass media; science communication; science journalism

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23940312      PMCID: PMC3752168          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1212745110

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  10 in total

1.  Journalists, broadcasters, scientific experts and public opinion.

Authors:  S Rothman
Journal:  Minerva       Date:  1990

2.  The quality of media reports on discoveries related to human genetic diseases.

Authors:  Neil A Holtzman; Barbara A Bernhardt; Eliza Mountcastle-Shah; Joann E Rodgers; Ellen Tambor; Gail Geller
Journal:  Community Genet       Date:  2005

3.  Science and society. Framing Science.

Authors:  Matthew C Nisbet; Chris Mooney
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-04-06       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Science communication. Interactions with the mass media.

Authors:  Hans Peter Peters; Dominique Brossard; Suzanne de Cheveigné; Sharon Dunwoody; Monika Kallfass; Steve Miller; Shoji Tsuchida
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-07-11       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Science journalism: Supplanting the old media?

Authors:  Geoff Brumfiel
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2009-03-19       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Predicting scientists' participation in public life.

Authors:  John C Besley; Sang Hwa Oh; Matthew Nisbet
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2012-10-17

7.  Scientific citizenship in a democratic society.

Authors:  Vilhjálmur Arnason
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2012-07-24

8.  How scientists view the public, the media and the political process.

Authors:  John C Besley; Matthew Nisbet
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2011-08-30

9.  Opinion polls. An inside/outside view of U.S. science.

Authors:  Jeffrey Mervis
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-07-10       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Colloquium paper: engaging the public in biodiversity issues.

Authors:  Michael J Novacek
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2008-08-11       Impact factor: 11.205

  10 in total
  29 in total

1.  Neurodharma Self-Help: Personalized Science Communication as Brain Management.

Authors:  Jenny Eklöf
Journal:  J Med Humanit       Date:  2017-09

2.  The sciences of science communication.

Authors:  Baruch Fischhoff
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Opinion: Lay summaries needed to enhance science communication.

Authors:  Lauren M Kuehne; Julian D Olden
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-03-24       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  An analysis of nanoscientists as public communicators.

Authors:  Anthony Dudo; LeeAnn Kahlor; Niveen AbiGhannam; Allison Lazard; Ming-Ching Liang
Journal:  Nat Nanotechnol       Date:  2014-09-14       Impact factor: 39.213

5.  Science cafés: engaging scientists and community through health and science dialogue.

Authors:  Syed Ahmed; Mia C DeFino; Emily R Connors; Anne Kissack; Zeno Franco
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 4.689

6.  Time for a prepublication culture in clinical research?

Authors:  Michael S Lauer; Harlan M Krumholz; Eric J Topol
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  A scenario for writing creative scenarios.

Authors:  Michael D Murphy; Don R Day
Journal:  Socioecol Pract Res       Date:  2021-06-07

8.  A critical evaluation of science outreach via social media: its role and impact on scientists.

Authors:  Craig McClain; Liz Neeley
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2014-12-09

9.  Understanding the Societal Impact of the Social Sciences and Humanities: Remarks on Roles, Challenges, and Expectations.

Authors:  Benedikt Fecher; Freia Kuper; Nataliia Sokolovska; Alex Fenton; Stefan Hornbostel; Gert G Wagner
Journal:  Front Res Metr Anal       Date:  2021-07-01

10.  Engaging scientists: An online survey exploring the experience of innovative biotechnological approaches to controlling vector-borne diseases.

Authors:  Christophe Boëte; Uli Beisel; Luísa Reis Castro; Nicolas Césard; R Guy Reeves
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2015-08-10       Impact factor: 3.876

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.