Model Of Scientific Communication Research Articles

Scientific temper: towards an alternate model of science-society relationships

Scientific temper, a mainstay in Indian science policies and science communication/education programmes, conceptualises citizens as scientifically conscious and powerful agents that approach societal issues with a rational and critical mind rather than taking refuge in religious, superstitious and pseudoscientific worldviews. Our essay provides a brief history of this term and compares it with existing science communication models to demonstrate how, despite sharing commonalities, it is distinct from models like deficit, dialogue, and participation. We elucidate how scientific temper fosters critical features like a process-oriented approach, reflexivity, democratisation of scientific expertise and being a potential tool for decolonisation. Lastly, we propose scientific temper as an alternate framework for democratising knowledge-making and -sharing, building an engaged deliberative citizenry, and studying science-society relationships overall.

Who engages whom?—Deficit communication in participatory science governance as democratic deficit

Abstract This article builds on the evolving relationship between science and society, focusing on the increasing emphasis on public participation in science decision-making processes. Public participation in science is often regarded as an embodiment of democratic principles that grant citizens the opportunity to engage with and influence scientific and technological developments. However, deficit models of science communication in participatory governance may be turning into democratic deficits. This article critically examines the deficit model of science communication, highlighting its potential democratic deficit. Drawing on empirical evidence from two case studies in a rural, socio-economically underdeveloped region in Portugal, the authors analyse the dynamics between agency and structure in hierarchical decision-making structures and power relations. We recommend policy implications to enhance the democratic quality of participatory science governance processes, based on convergence of initiatives, transparency, and new prospects for science communication.

Science communication objectives and actual practices of science news websites as a showcase for gaps between theory and practice

This study contributes to the growing body of science communication research showing gaps between theory and practice objectives, focusing on one particular understudied and emerging science communication innovation.The objectives and practices of four Israeli science news websites were analyzed considering three science communication models: “Dissemination”, “Dialogue”, and “Participation.” Using concurrent parallel mixed methods, we examined the perspectives of website administrators (n=8) and readers (n=20) through interviews, a content analysis of news items (n=298), discussion threads (n=507), and reader questionnaires (n=89). Findings indicate limited adoption of two-way communication about how science is applied in society. The scant implementation of the dialogue model suggests its promises are not concretized in practice on these science news websites.

More complex than expected—mapping activities and youths’ experiences at BioBlitz events to the rosette model of science communication

Deficit, dialogue, or participation—which of these three main models of science communications is the best fit to describe activities and experiences of citizen science? One might assume that participation is the best match, but the reality of citizen science events is more complex. The rosette model of science communication offers a more detailed set of subcategories, e.g., educate, entertain, or do, in addition to the three main models—deficit, dialogue and participation. To systematically describe citizen science activities and experiences, we apply data on what activities are offered and what young people (5–19 years old) experience when participating in a citizen science event format called BioBlitzes across the rosette model. The mapping results illustrate how the rosette model can help to make citizen science project designers and practitioners more aware of the various modes of science communications that they may encounter at BioBlitz events and inform their design decisions regarding how settings can shape participants’ experiences.

Engaging young people in science communication about mental health during COVID-19

Many young people struggle with their mental health and the COVID-19 pandemic compounded these challenges. However, young people are rarely involved in research and communication about causes and coping strategies. We used an online game as a conversation starter and co-created a list of coping strategies with young people to apply the dialogue model of science communication and facilitate social conversation about mental health during COVID-19. The young people found the involvement was valuable as it led to self-reflection, social reflection with peers and an experience of recognition and contribution. We discuss challenges and urge researchers to explore ways for open dialogue and co-creation as strategic and contributing parts of the research process.

Actitudes de los editores de revistas académicas brasileñas hacia la revisión por pares abierta (open peer review). Una encuesta

Open review is one of the components of open science that scientific journals are incorporating in their editorial processes. In contrast to open access to literature and research data, open review still raises many doubts and concerns among the involved parties (editors, reviewers and authors). This article aims to analyze the perception of editors of Brazilian academic journals on open peer review. To achieve this, a questionnaire was sent to 3,208 editors, out of which 351 responded to the full set of 42 questions. The editors expressed satisfaction with the current model of scientific communication, the double-blind model, and disagreed with any type of identification of reviewers. However, they perceived an advantage in open review, as it allows for mutual interaction between authors and reviewers with the goal of improving the quality of content. As barriers, they pointed out conflicts of interest and rivalries that open review might generate and the difficulty in finding reviewers willing to accept this review model. The overall conclusion points to a conservative profile among editors regarding the introduction of open peer review practices.

Distrusting Consensus

Although the institutional model of science communication operated well during the corona-pandemic, and relevant public institutions (media, science, politics) garnered higher levels of trust following “rally-around-the-flag” dynamics, other people would develop distrusts towards those institutions and the emerging orthodox corona narrative. Their ideas are often framed as conspiracy theories, and today’s globalized media eco-system enables their proliferation. This looming “infodemic” became a prime object of concern. In this article I agnostically study those distrusts from a cultural sociological perspective to better understand how and why people (came to) disbelieve official knowledge and their producers. To do so, I draw on my ethnographic fieldwork in the off- and online worlds of people labeled as conspiracy theorists in the Netherlands, which includes the media they consume, share and produce. Based on an inductive analysis of people’s own sense-making, I present three dominant reasons: media’s panicky narrative of fear and mayhem; governments sole focus on lockdowns and vaccines; and the exclusion of heterodox scientific perspectives in the public sphere. Each of these reasons problematize a perceived orthodoxy in media, politics and science, and this uniformity bred suspicion about possible conspiracies between these public institutions. Too much consensus gets distrusted. While we can discard those ideas as irrational conspiracy theories, I conclude that these findings have important implications for the way we deal with and communicate about complex societal problems. Next to keeping things simple and clear, as crisis/risk/science communication holds, we need to allow for uncertainty, critique and epistemic diversity as well.

Типы социальной организации в коммуникативной модели «ученый-эксперт»

The institutionalization of science and the strengthening of its role in the socio-cultural space produces fundamentally new models of scientific communication. One of them is the «scientist-expert» model, which actualizes the specific elements of communication with the «customer». Being regulated by certain social norms, the relationship between experts and the requirements placed on them by customers can be considered in the modality of external types of social regulation. Formally, such communication gravitates toward the legislative type of social regulation, that is, the complete institutionalization of its activities in exchange for resources. However the experts themselves, representing a local social group, tend to traditional types of social regulation. Such a contradiction is one of the key factors in the dissatisfaction of a number of experts with their position.

Socioscientific issues in science exhibitions: examining contributions of the informal science education sector

This paper examines how a particular subset of informal science education settings — science exhibitions — embraces contemporary socioscientific issues (SSI) and fosters public engagement with them. A qualitative cross-case analysis of two SSI exhibitions about teen pregnancy (Brazil) and sustainability (Canada) was conducted. It revealed complex issues around operational funding, and institutional tensions related to the nature, balance, and relevance of the topics displayed. The analysis unravelled opportunities for SSI exhibits to engage with contextualized and situated knowledge; articulate the deficit model with other models of science communication; and consider visitors as agents of change.

Editorial

The physicist and science communicator Jorge Wagensberg used to say that the creativity of the human mind requires three things: to have a good idea, to know that the idea is good, and to convince others of it. But to have a good idea, we first need to look curiously at the world around us and ask the right questions. These questions may need to change as knowledge grows and events unfold. Years ago, when we talked about the climate emergency, the main question was what we needed to do to prevent climate change from crossing critical thresholds. The problem is that we did not take this question very seriously, or perhaps we did not like the answer enough, and so the main question we are facing now is how to ensure that the impact of climate change on our societies is minimised, and how to adapt to this new scenario which, if nothing changes, will only get worse in the coming years. What is both comical and worrying is that just as the consequences of climate change are becoming impossible to deny or ignore, the number and aggressiveness of climate deniers and delayers on the Internet is growing in parallel.
 In this scenario, it is more important than ever to reflect on the models of science communication that we are currently implementing, as Professor Hans Peter Peters does in the article that opens this new volume of Metode Science Studies Journal. This volume contains four monographs that address necessary questions and issues, such as the opportunities, challenges and threats facing drylands today, the origins of human societies, the One Health framework and how it can help us, and whether there is anything natural about the concept of beauty. Four monographs born of curiosity about the world around us, our own species, and the questions we ask ourselves in the face of new challenges that make us think and reflect. In short, they are the genesis of new ideas, always based on science.

Why facts don't change minds: Insights from cognitive science for the improved communication of conservation research

Conservation scientists increasingly seek to find ways to implement their research for improved policy and practice. However, such efforts may be ineffective, or even counterproductive, if they are based on outdated models of science communication and behavioral change. Insights from fields that study how information is processed in the brain, how and why humans make decisions and take action, and how change spreads across social networks can support and improve existing efforts to translate conservation research into practice and policy. However, little of this research has made its way into the conservation science literature, thus limiting the power of these ideas to influence how research is communicated and how impact is understood. This paper seeks to address this gap by discussing four common myths about how to best communicate science for decision-making, namely, that facts change minds, scientific literacy will lead to enhanced research uptake, individual attitude change will shift collective behaviors, and broad dissemination is best. The article provides four alternative insights that can support effective science communication and impact: engaging the social mind for optimal decision-making, understanding the power of values, emotions, and experience in swaying minds, changing collective behavior, and thinking strategically for biggest impact. If we can understand how people process information, we can design interventions based on the best possible evidence of how humans make decisions for conservation management and policy.

The Impact of Neoliberalism on Models of Science Communication

The Impact of Neoliberalism on Models of Science Communication

ParsBERT topic modeling of Persian scientific articles about COVID-19

PurposeThe COVID-19 pandemic has indisputably impacted every aspect of human life, and a host of studies have investigated its different aspects. This paper models the contents of Persian literature on COVID-19. MethodThis is a descriptive-exploratory study in which 815 articles were collected from the Magiran database. The articles were published before March 2022. The abstracts and titles were used in the modeling. The modeling was performed by combining the latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) algorithm with ParsBERT. FindingsTopic modeling indicated ten major topics, including medicine, psychology, humanities, politics, management, biology, economics, culture, engineering, and religion. The articles under the category of medicine had the largest cluster (42.3%), while engineering and religion had the smallest clusters (1.1% each). ConclusionThe found topics in the created clusters have structural relationships. The COVID-19 effect on physical and mental health (medical and psychological topics) is the most crucial factor. These clusters provide evidence that COVID-19 affects all facets of human society at three levels: the individual, family, and society. Aside from the ten critical clusters in the humanities field, the utmost disorder is related to teaching and learning. For the first time, this research has presented a model of scientific communication in the field of COVID-19 based on the data collected from a Persian database – Magiran.

Dissemination or participation? Exploring scientists' definitions and science communication goals in the Netherlands.

The field of science communication has grown considerably over the past decade, and so have the number of scientific writings on what science communication is and how it should be practiced. The multitude of theoretisations and models has led to a lack of clarity in defining science communication, and to a highly popularised-and theorised-rhetorical shift from deficit to dialogue and participation. With this study, we aim to remediate the absence of research into what science communication is, for scientists themselves. We also investigate whether the transition towards dialogue and participation is reflected in the goals scientists identify as important to their science communication efforts, both in a general and a social media context. For this, we analyse survey data collected from scientists in the Netherlands using thematic qualitative analysis and statistical analysis. Our results reveal six main dimensions of science communication as defined by our respondents. The 584 definitions we analyse demonstrate a focus on a one-way process of transmission and translation of scientific results and their impacts towards a lay audience, via mostly traditional media channels, with the goals of making science more accessible, of educating audiences, and of raising awareness about science. In terms of the goals identified as most important by scientists in the Netherlands, we find goals aligned with the deficit and dialogue models of science communication to be the most important. Overall, our findings suggest we should be cautious in the face of recent claims that we live in a new era of dialogue, transparency, and participation in the realm of science communication.

Science communication: a messy conundrum of practice, research and theory

Theoretical perspectives of science communication were initially driven by practice, which in turn have influenced practice and further science communication scholarship. The practice of science communication includes a variety of quite diverse roles. Likewise, the scholarship of science communication draws upon a mix of disciplines. I argue that the apparent messiness of science communication scholarship and practice is also its wealth. If blame can be avoided in developing and applying science communication models, and if the coexistence of all science communication models can be embraced then both the scholarship and practice of science communication is likely to be more effective.

Opportunities for poaching: using the public's enjoyment of popular culture to foster dialogues around genetics

Introduction: Engagement, education and communication with public audiences have long been seen as important for maximising the benefits of genetics and genomics. An important challenge is how to structure engagement in such a way that recognises the value and legitimacy of diverse public opinions and voices alongside scientific expertise. In other words, how to operationalise the dialogue model of science communication. In order for diverse public voices to be heard it is important to understand the resources that people have to make sense of science on their own terms. In this paper we provide a framework for how people's resources can be identified in relation to the culture they consume. Methods: A cross sectional online survey (n=1407) explored the cultural tastes and practices of a representative British public audience. Latent class analysis identified groups with similar cultural practices. Regression analysis was used to explore the relationship between the latent classes and other measures, such beliefs about genetics. Results: Three latent classes were identified each with distinctive cultural practices and tastes. Some clear relationships were found between the latent classes and familiarity with genetic terminology. However, for more complex beliefs, such as genetic causation, regression analysis yielded null or uncertain results with no clear correlation found. Discussion: This paper provides an analysis of how people's enjoyment of culture could be a resource for understanding and advancing science communication and engagement. The results are discussed using two complementary theoretical frameworks. Using Bourdieu's concept of cultural capital, the exclusionary power culture can be seen. The work of De Certaeu, on the other hand, shows how this power can be resisted and subverted. While this paper focuses on genetics and genomics we argue that this approach provides a `proof of concept' that these ideas can be extended for use in wider science engagement contexts.

Evaluating UK Pharmacy Workers' Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviour towards Antimicrobial Stewardship and Assessing the Impact of Training in Community Pharmacy.

The Antibiotic Guardian (AG) campaign, developed in 2014 is an online ‘pledge’ approach to engage health workers and the public about antimicrobial resistance. It is underpinned by models of science communication and behaviour change. Since its launch until the end of 2021, more than 140,000 individuals pledged. A service evaluation was conducted to determine the impact of the campaign upon UK pharmacy workers, in response to national training introduced in 2020. Pledged pharmacy workers were sent an online questionnaire collating demographics, self-reported behaviour and opportunity to support prudent antibiotic use. It also investigated respondents’ daily practice and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) efforts, and motivations for pledging. Capability was measured with a set of knowledge questions. Awareness of changes to the Community Pharmacy Quality Scheme in England to include incentivized training on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) was explored. Of the 5344 pharmacy workers invited to participate, 783 (14.6%) responded to the survey. There was a statistically significant difference between job roles and capability score. Pharmacists, including Academic and Hospital Pharmacists and Pharmacy Technicians reported higher confidence and capability scores than Dispensers and Pharmacy Assistants (F = 13.776, p = 0.0002). Respondents reported strong knowledge on antimicrobial resistance and high confidence in fulfilling their AG stewardship pledge within daily practices (92.7% of all respondents answered all capability questions, as measured by knowledge, correctly). Two thirds of respondents (61.6% (423/693)) agreed or strongly agreed that they had access to and were able to utilise local antibiotic prescribing guidance and a similar proportion of responding community pharmacists (60%) were aware of the content of their workplace AMS plans. No statistically significant relationships were found between motivations for pledging and subsequent behaviour; pledging due to mandatory requirements of work-place training was the most common answer in both 2019 (42%) and 2020 (54%) cohorts. This evaluation supports the value of the AG pledge-based approach to engage and educate pharmacy workers. Reflections show its impact on increasing evidence-based stewardship for pharmacy workers and their response to mandatory training requirement by employers highlights the effectiveness of the AG campaign to promote AMS within pharmacy teams.

Understanding the Scientific Topics in the Chinese Government’s Communication about COVID-19: An LDA Approach

The communication of scientific topics can play a key role in the fight against misinformation and has become an important component of governments’ communication regarding COVID-19. This study reviewed the Chinese government’s COVID-19 information sources and identified the patterns of science communication models within them. A corpus of science-related content was collected and coded from 1521 news briefings announced by the Chinese government. An LDA (latent Dirichlet allocation) topic model, correlation analysis, and ANOVA were used to analyze the framing of the scientific topics and their social environmental characteristics. The major findings showed the following: (1) The frames in the Chinese government’s communication of scientific topics about COVID-19 had three purposes—to disseminate knowledge about prevention and control, epidemiological investigations, and the public’s personal health; to make the public understand scientific R&D in Chinese medicine, enterprises, vaccines, treatment options, and medical resources; and to involve citizens, communities, and enterprises in scientific decision making. (2) The frames were correlated with the public and media concerns. (3) The frames varied with the different levels of officials, different types of government agencies, different income regional governments, and different severity levels of the epidemic. (4) The topics concerning sustainability science were more correlated with public and media concern. In addition, we propose several suggestions for building sustainable communication approaches during the pandemic.

Science as Experience: A Deweyan Model of Science Communication

AbstractThe field of science communication is plagued by challenges. Communicators face the difficulty of responding to unjustified public skepticism over issues like climate change and COVID-19 while also acknowledging the fallibility and limitations of scientific knowledge. Our goal in this paper is to suggest a new model for science communication that can help foster more productive, respectful relationships among all those involved in science communication. Inspired by the pragmatist philosophy of John Dewey, we develop an experience model, according to which science communication consists in people’s experiences with science and the meanings they develop from those experiences. Three principles are central to the model: experience is cumulative, context matters, and audiences have agency. We argue that this model has significant implications both for communication research and practice, which we illustrate by applying it to the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy. We show how science communicators can help to identify and alleviate structural factors that contribute to skepticism as well as fostering opportunities for meaning making around shared experiences.

De 'youtubers' a 'cultubers'. Un fenómeno de divulgación académica, cultural y científica en YouTube

El término youtuber ha arrastrado connotaciones negativas cuando se ha visto reducido únicamente para definir a los creadores de YouTube ligados al sector del videojuego y el entretenimiento. Paralelamente al éxito cuantitativo de este tipo de youtubers, en los últimos años han ido emergiendo en esta plataforma divulgadores de prácticamente la totalidad de campos académicos, culturales y científicos. Dentro de la realidad digital de habla hispana, han surgido comunidades como Cultube que reúnen a este tipo de creadores y promocionan esta nueva vía de divulgación científica en la red social de vídeo con mayor popularidad. Basándonos en una metodología cualitativa a partir de la teoría fundamentada, este artículo presenta los resultados del análisis semiótico-discursivo realizado sobre la totalidad de las intervenciones efectuadas en las tres ediciones de Cultube celebradas hasta la fecha: 2018, 2019 y 2021. Este caso de estudio sirve también para profundizar en el fenómeno global y creciente de los divulgadores científicos en YouTube, su papel en la democratización mundial del aprendizaje asociada a los nuevos medios y sus potencialidades para el futuro.