Research: Scicomm

The Science of Science Communication

The Science of Science Communication

This colloquium was held in Washington, D.C. May 21-22, 2012.  The meeting surveyed the state of the art of empirical social science research in science communication and focused on research in psychology, decision science, mass communication, risk communication, health communication, political science, sociology, and related fields on the communication dynamics surrounding issues in science, engineering, technology, and medicine.

See video recordings of the presentations here.

Read the proceedings of the conference here.

Source – http://www.nasonline.org/programs/sackler-colloquia/completed_colloquia/science-communication.html

What is the 'Science of Science Communication'?

What is the 'Science of Science Communication'?

ABSTRACT: This essay seeks to explain what the “science of science communication” is by *doing* it. Surveying studies of cultural cognition and related dynamics, it demonstrates how the form of disciplined observation, measurement, and inference distinctive of scientific inquiry can be used to test rival hypotheses on the nature of persistent public conflict over societal risks; indeed, it argues that satisfactory insight into this phenomenon can be achieved only by these means, as opposed to the ad hoc story-telling dominant in popular and even some forms of scholarly discourse. Synthesizing the evidence, the essay proposes that conflict over what is known by science arises from the very conditions of individual freedom and cultural pluralism that make liberal democratic societies distinctively congenial to science. This tension, however, is not an “inherent contradiction”; it is a problem to be solved — by the science of science communication understood as a “new political science” for perfecting enlightened self-government.

Source – https://jcom.sissa.it/sites/default/files/documents/JCOM_1403_2015_Y04.pdf

Geoengineering and Climate Change Polarization: Testing a Two-channel Model of Science Communication

Geoengineering and Climate Change Polarization: Testing a Two-channel Model of Science Communication

ABSTRACT: We conducted a two-nation study (United States, n = 1500; England, n = 1500) to test a novel theory of science communication. The cultural cognition thesis posits that individuals make extensive reliance on cultural meanings in forming perceptions of risk. The logic of the cultural cognition thesis suggests the potential value of a distinctive two-channel science communication strategy that combines information content (“Channel 1”) with cultural meanings (“Channel 2”) selected to promote open-minded assessment of information across diverse communities. In the study, scientific information content on climate change was held constant while the cultural meaning of that information was experimentally manipulated. Consistent with the study hypotheses, we found that making citizens aware of the potential contribution of geoengineering as a supplement to restriction of CO2 emissions helps to offset cultural polarization over the validity of climate-change science. We also tested the hypothesis, derived from competing models of science communication, that exposure to information on geoengineering would provoke discounting of climate-change risks generally. Contrary to this hypothesis, we found that subjects exposed to information about geoengineering were slightly more concerned about climate change risks than those assigned to a control condition.

Source – https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1981907