Literature DB >> 25225389

Science communication as political communication.

Dietram A Scheufele1.   

Abstract

Scientific debates in modern societies often blur the lines between the science that is being debated and the political, moral, and legal implications that come with its societal applications. This manuscript traces the origins of this phenomenon to professional norms within the scientific discipline and to the nature and complexities of modern science and offers an expanded model of science communication that takes into account the political contexts in which science communication takes place. In a second step, it explores what we know from empirical work in political communication, public opinion research, and communication research about the dynamics that determine how issues are debated and attitudes are formed in political environments. Finally, it discusses how and why it will be increasingly important for science communicators to draw from these different literatures to ensure that the voice of the scientific community is heard in the broader societal debates surrounding science.

Keywords:  advocacy; deficit model; medialization; motivated reasoning; public attitudes

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25225389      PMCID: PMC4183176          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1317516111

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


  16 in total

1.  Controversial medical and agri-food biotechnology: a cultivation analysis.

Authors:  Martin W Bauer
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2002-04

Review 2.  The case for motivated reasoning.

Authors:  Z Kunda
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  Science communication. Public acceptance of evolution.

Authors:  Jon D Miller; Eugenie C Scott; Shinji Okamoto
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-08-11       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.  New media landscapes and the science information consumer.

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

6.  Bringing values and deliberation to science communication.

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

7.  What's next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions.

Authors:  Matthew C Nisbet; Dietram A Scheufele
Journal:  Am J Bot       Date:  2009-09-03       Impact factor: 3.844

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

Authors:  Monika Kurath; Priska Gisler
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2009-09

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

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

10.  Public attitudes toward biofuels. Effects of knowledge, political partisanship, and media use.

Authors:  Michael A Cacciatore; Andrew R Binder; Dietram A Scheufele; Bret R Shaw
Journal:  Politics Life Sci       Date:  2012 Spring-Fall
View more
  23 in total

1.  "Reliable Sources" in Cable News: Analyzing Network Fragmentation in Coverage of Reform Policy.

Authors:  Bethany Anne Conway-Silva; Jennifer N Ervin; Kate Kenski
Journal:  Journal Stud       Date:  2020-02-12

2.  What we know about effective public engagement on CRISPR and beyond.

Authors:  Dietram A Scheufele; Nicole M Krause; Isabelle Freiling; Dominique Brossard
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Facial appearance affects science communication.

Authors:  Ana I Gheorghiu; Mitchell J Callan; William J Skylark
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Evaluating science communication.

Authors:  Baruch Fischhoff
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  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

6.  Science, Innovation and the Future of Humanity.

Authors:  Milton H Saier; J T Trevors
Journal:  J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2017-04-28

7.  The Science of Science Communication II.

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

8.  Editorial: Are We All Better-than-Average Drivers, and Better-than-Average Kissers? Outwitting the Kruger-Dunning Effect in Clinical Practice and Research.

Authors:  Seth S Leopold
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Public engagement: Faculty lived experiences and perspectives underscore barriers and a changing culture in academia.

Authors:  Mikhaila N Calice; Becca Beets; Luye Bao; Dietram A Scheufele; Isabelle Freiling; Dominique Brossard; Noah Weeth Feinstein; Laura Heisler; Travis Tangen; Jo Handelsman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 3.752

Review 10.  Science and Bioethics of CRISPR-Cas9 Gene Editing: An Analysis Towards Separating Facts and Fiction.

Authors:  Adam P Cribbs; Sumeth M W Perera
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  2017-12-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.