Literature DB >> 23940316

New media landscapes and the science information consumer.

Dominique Brossard1.   

Abstract

Individuals are increasingly turning to online environments to find information about science and to follow scientific developments. It is therefore crucial for scientists and scientific institutions to consider empirical findings from research in online science communication when thinking about science in the public sphere. After providing a snapshot of the current media landscape, this paper reviews recent major research findings related to science communication in the online environment and their implications for science in the 21st century. Particular emphasis is given to the bias introduced by search engines, the nature of scientific content encountered online, and the potential impact of the Internet on audiences' knowledge and attitudes toward science.

Keywords:  blogs; social media

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23940316      PMCID: PMC3752175          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1212744110

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


  7 in total

1.  Another (methodological) look at knowledge gaps and the Internet's potential for closing them.

Authors:  Michael A Cacciatore; Dietram A Scheufele; Elizabeth A Corley
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2012-06-19

2.  Seeking science information online: Data mining Google to better understand the roles of the media and the education system.

Authors:  Elad Segev; Ayelet Baram-Tsabari
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2010-12-01

3.  An integrated model of communication influence on beliefs.

Authors:  William P Eveland; Kathryn E Cooper
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Social science. Science, new media, and the public.

Authors:  Dominique Brossard; Dietram A Scheufele
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  The changing information environment for nanotechnology: online audiences and content.

Authors:  Ashley A Anderson; Dominique Brossard; Dietram A Scheufele
Journal:  J Nanopart Res       Date:  2010-02-07       Impact factor: 2.253

6.  Understanding the factors that influence the adoption and meaningful use of social media by physicians to share medical information.

Authors:  Brian S McGowan; Molly Wasko; Bryan Steven Vartabedian; Robert S Miller; Desirae D Freiherr; Maziar Abdolrasulnia
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2012-09-24       Impact factor: 5.428

7.  Research blogging: indexing and registering the change in science 2.0.

Authors:  Sibele Fausto; Fabio A Machado; Luiz Fernando J Bento; Atila Iamarino; Tatiana R Nahas; David S Munger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total
  36 in total

1.  Communicating science in social settings.

Authors:  Dietram A Scheufele
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 11.205

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.  Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news.

Authors:  Dietram A Scheufele; Nicole M Krause
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-01-14       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences.

Authors:  Michael F Dahlstrom
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-09-15       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  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

7.  Public communication of science 2.0: Is the communication of science via the "new media" online a genuine transformation or old wine in new bottles?

Authors:  Hans Peter Peters; Sharon Dunwoody; Joachim Allgaier; Yin-Yueh Lo; Dominique Brossard
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2014-06-11       Impact factor: 8.807

Review 8.  Pharmaceutical Benefit-Risk Communication Tools: A Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Dominic Way; Hortense Blazsin; Ragnar Löfstedt; Frederic Bouder
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 5.606

9.  Widespread use of internet, applications, and social media in the professional life of urology residents.

Authors:  Johannes Salem; Hendrik Borgmann; Martin Baunacke; Katharina Boehm; Julian Hanske; Andrew Macneily; Christian Meyer; Tim Nestler; Marianne Schmid; Johannes Huber
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 10.  Threats of antibiotic resistance: an obliged reappraisal.

Authors:  Fernando Baquero
Journal:  Int Microbiol       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 2.479

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.