Communicating Science Effectively A Research Agenda (2017) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 The Complexities of Communicating Science
2 The Complexities of Communicating Science
Pages 23-50
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 23... ...
People approach science communication from their own starting points -- a combination of expectations, knowledge, skills, beliefs, and values that are in turn shaped by broader social, political, and economic influences. Organizations and institutions involved in science communication add their own concerns and influences.
|
From page 24... ...
Thus, an effective science communication strategy will be iterative and adaptable. In particular, it will evolve over time based on lessons learned about what is and is not working, as well as shifting needs and opportunities.
|
From page 25... ...
As gene editing science advances, it spurs many questions about the science and its applications, as well the ethics and governance of its use. More generally, public engagement offers opportunities to facilitate transparency and informed consent among stakeholders and for each stakeholder to both learn from and teach others involved in the debate.
|
From page 26... ...
. It should be noted, however, that most, although not all, of the available research focuses on public engagement efforts at the local to regional levels (National Research Council, 2008)
|
From page 27... ...
However, scientific findings often represent work in progress, are applicable only to particular contexts or populations, or are unsettled about questions to which the public wants clear answers. This section focuses on the uncertainty associated with scientific information and the challenges it poses for science communication.
|
From page 28... ...
. In addition, while the science may be relatively certain in one context, its application to another context, particularly to a complex local problem such as the contamination of a water supply or the implications of climate change, may increase scientific uncertainty.
|
From page 29... ...
This section addresses how three key aspects of audiences affect science communication: (1) prior knowledge of science, (2)
|
From page 30... ...
Research also is needed to determine their particular importance when a societal issue is contentious or when the science itself is controversial. Prior Knowledge of Science: Debunking the "Deficit Model" A long-standing question among science communicators is whether people have sufficient understanding and skills, such as science literacy, to make sense of science communication and to express their views as informed citizens on issues involving science.
|
From page 31... ...
. Ability to Understand Numeric Information Numerical information and concepts are often an important part of communicating scientific information, including scientific uncertainty.
|
From page 32... ...
. The role of beliefs in science communication when science is involved in public controversy is discussed further in Chapter 3.
|
From page 33... ...
. Furthermore, people with lower numeracy are more likely to rely on these heuristics when engaging in complex judgments and decisions such as those that involve science, and especially scientific uncertainty (Peters et al., 2006; Sinayev and Peters, 2015)
|
From page 34... ...
SOCIAL INFLUENCES ON HOW PEOPLE INTERPRET SCIENCE Little research has examined directly how groups and social contexts (e.g., social networks, group norms, group membership, social identity) in which people are situated influence science communication (Bliuc et al., 2015; Pearson and Schuldt, 2015)
|
From page 35... ...
Groups that may differ in their attentiveness or response to science communication may be distinguished by race, ethnicity, language status, income, or education level, and their responses may differ as a result of differences in conditions, norms, beliefs, or experiences. Some of these disparities with respect to knowledge acquisition -- often called "knowledge gaps" -- are discussed in Chapter 4.
|
From page 36... ...
. While the methods and tools from these fields may be useful for science communication, any practices from these fields would need to be tested in the context of science communication where persuasion was the goal.
|
From page 37... ...
. Emphasis Framing In this line of research, frames are rendered as interpretive story lines that communicate what is at stake in a complex policy debate and why the issue matters.
|
From page 38... ...
. Narratives can increase audience engagement with and attention to science communication, and be easier to remember and process (Bekker et al., 2013; Dahlstrom, 2014; Kanouse et al., 2016; Winterbottom et al., 2008)
|
From page 39... ...
. (For further discussion of networks in science communication, see Chapter 4.)
|
From page 40... ...
From the perspective of science, a goal of communicating with policy makers is to ensure that relevant scientific information is received and understood by those who may use it to make a decision. From this perspective, it may be sufficient to assess the effectiveness of science communication by documenting that the information was received, understood, shared, or discussed in a formal policy process (e.g., formal arguments, congressional testimony, public deliberations)
|
From page 41... ...
Brokering may include facilitating agenda setting and other conversations among multiple stakeholders regarding complex or contentious societal problems that involve science. Although individuals may serve as brokers, "boundary organizations" also play this role and have been identified as critical to increasing evidence-informed decision making (Dobbins et al., 2009)
|
From page 42... ...
These ongoing relationships among researchers, policy makers, and practitioners can benefit science communication directly by building understanding of science and trust (discussed further below) that can thwart attempts to draw science into public controversy (Bryk et al., 2011; Cohen-Vogel et al., 2015; Tseng, 2012)
|
From page 43... ...
Factors That Affect Trust and Credibility In science communication, the audience decides whether communicators as sources of information, or the institutions they represent, are credible and trustworthy and credible. People use these assessments to decide what information to pay attention to and often, what to think about that information.
|
From page 44... ...
. Individual and social factors beyond political ideology, such as race or ethnicity, income, religiosity, social capital, education, and knowledge, all can affect public trust in sources of information about science and of science itself, depending on the topic and the nature of the science being conveyed (Brewer and Ley, 2013; Gauchat, 2011, 2012; McCright et al., 2013b; Sturgis and Allum, 2004; Yearley, 2005)
|
From page 45... ...
. Preliminary research suggests that, at least in some circumstances, creating a less partisan atmosphere for scientists to engage with laypeople and apply logical reasoning to scientific evidence as part of drawing conclusions can help counteract motivated reasoning (Jamieson and Hardy, 2014)
|
From page 46... ...
Outcomes of Science Communication Affected by Trust and Credibility As noted earlier, trust and credibility are important to science communication because they affect the degree of attention people pay to guidance from scientific experts, as well as whether they believe scientific findings or support science-related decisions (Bleich et al., 2007; Brossard and Nisbet, 2007; McCright et al., 2016; Rabinovich and Morton, 2012)
|
From page 47... ...
APPLYING THE LESSONS OF LARGE-SCALE SCIENCE COMMUNICATION EFFORTS Perhaps some of the most pertinent wisdom about effective science communication comes from experience with large-scale information campaigns, such as those for public health, undertaken to inform the public, shape opinions, and motivate behavior change. The challenges and successes of such campaigns offer a number of lessons, described below.
|
From page 48... ...
. The case of gene editing, for example, highlights the need to consider public engagement efforts as early as possible in the evolution of a technology, well before it is developed and ready to be applied (Jasanoff et al., 2015)
|
From page 49... ...
. In the cases of smoking cessation, high blood pressure control, and prevention of HIV transmission, for example, communication efforts continued for months and even years, multiple agencies and constituencies engaged with the issue, the campaigns entailed routine media coverage, and so on.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.