Hype in Science Communication: Exploring Scientists' Attitudes and Practices in Quantum Physics

Soto-Sanfiel, María T., Chong, Chin-Wen, Latorre, José I.
{"title":"Hype in Science Communication: Exploring Scientists' Attitudes and\n Practices in Quantum Physics","authors":"Soto-Sanfiel, María T., Chong, Chin-Wen, Latorre, José I.","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2311.07160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An interpretive phenomenological approach is adopted to investigate scientists' attitudes and practices related to hype in science communication. Twenty-four active quantum physicists participated in 5 focus groups. Through a semi-structured questionnaire, their use of hype, attitudes, behaviours, and perspectives on hype in science communication were observed. The main results show that scientists primarily attribute hype generation to themselves, major corporations, and marketing departments. They see hype as crucial for research funding and use it strategically, despite concerns. Scientists view hype as coercive, compromising their work's integrity, leading to mostly negative feelings about it, except for collaborator-generated hype. A dissonance exists between scientists' involvement in hype, their opinions, and the negative emotions it triggers. They manage this by attributing responsibility to the academic system, downplaying their practices. This reveals hype in science communication as a calculated, persuasive tactic by academic stakeholders, aligning with a neoliberal view of science. Implications extend to science communication, media studies, regulation, and academia.","PeriodicalId":496270,"journal":{"name":"arXiv (Cornell University)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv (Cornell University)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2311.07160","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

An interpretive phenomenological approach is adopted to investigate scientists' attitudes and practices related to hype in science communication. Twenty-four active quantum physicists participated in 5 focus groups. Through a semi-structured questionnaire, their use of hype, attitudes, behaviours, and perspectives on hype in science communication were observed. The main results show that scientists primarily attribute hype generation to themselves, major corporations, and marketing departments. They see hype as crucial for research funding and use it strategically, despite concerns. Scientists view hype as coercive, compromising their work's integrity, leading to mostly negative feelings about it, except for collaborator-generated hype. A dissonance exists between scientists' involvement in hype, their opinions, and the negative emotions it triggers. They manage this by attributing responsibility to the academic system, downplaying their practices. This reveals hype in science communication as a calculated, persuasive tactic by academic stakeholders, aligning with a neoliberal view of science. Implications extend to science communication, media studies, regulation, and academia.
科学传播中的炒作:探索科学家在量子物理学中的态度和实践
本文采用解释现象学的方法来研究科学家对科学传播中的炒作行为的态度和行为。24位活跃的量子物理学家参加了5个焦点小组。通过半结构化的问卷调查,观察了他们在科学传播中对炒作的使用、态度、行为和观点。主要结果表明,科学家们主要将炒作的产生归咎于自己、大公司和营销部门。他们认为炒作对研究资金至关重要,并有策略地利用它,尽管存在担忧。科学家们认为炒作是强制性的,损害了他们工作的完整性,除了合作者制造的炒作外,大多数人都会对它产生负面情绪。科学家参与炒作、发表观点和由此引发的负面情绪之间存在着不协调。他们通过将责任归咎于学术体系,淡化他们的实践来解决这个问题。这表明,科学传播中的炒作是学术利益相关者精心策划的、有说服力的策略,与新自由主义的科学观保持一致。影响延伸到科学传播、媒体研究、监管和学术界。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信