发布求助
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献

Public Understanding of Science最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
How do you argue with a science denial meme? Memed responses may be counter-productive for responding to science denial online. 你怎么反驳否认科学的表情包呢？模因反应对于回应网上的科学否认可能会适得其反。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2025-05-31 DOI: 10.1177/09636625251341509
Hannah Little, Justin Sulik
{"title":"How do you argue with a science denial meme? Memed responses may be counter-productive for responding to science denial online.","authors":"Hannah Little, Justin Sulik","doi":"10.1177/09636625251341509","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625251341509","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Science denial 'memes' are a viral form of communication that attempt to undermine complex scientific ideas using memorable soundbites. These memes misrepresent the scientific content they are 'debunking', making responding to them challenging. To identify common strategies, we analysed Twitter/X responses to the anti-evolution meme 'why are there still monkeys?'. Strategies included literal explanations about why the reasoning behind the meme is flawed, and analogies that mirror the original meme to varying degrees (e.g. in structure and/or domain). We evaluated different response strategies using an experiment with participants from the United States who either endorsed or denied evolution. Participants rated their understanding of the original meme and different response strategies, and how effective and persuasive they found them. Across participants, literal explanations were rated more understandable, effective and persuasive than analogical responses. Memed rebuttals may thus be a counter-productive strategy for responding to science denial online.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"9636625251341509"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144192339","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Tensions in the public communication by scientists and scientific institutions: Sources, dimensions, and ways forward. 科学家和科研机构在公众沟通中的紧张关系：来源、维度和前进方向。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2025-05-29 DOI: 10.1177/09636625251343507
Massimiano Bucchi, Mike S Schäfer
{"title":"Tensions in the public communication by scientists and scientific institutions: Sources, dimensions, and ways forward.","authors":"Massimiano Bucchi, Mike S Schäfer","doi":"10.1177/09636625251343507","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625251343507","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Tensions between scientific organizations' conceptions and demands regarding public communication on the one hand and the public communication of individual scientists on the other hand exist and may even become more prevalent. Such tensions revolve around issues of institutional reputation management and academic freedom, centralized messaging and individual autonomy, or scientific neutrality and political engagement, and can be catalyzed by changes in media landscapes and sociocultural contexts surrounding scientific institutions. This essay identifies sources and key dimensions of these tensions. It also explores how institutions manage such tensions and how scientists respond, ranging from loyalty to institutional policies to open dissent, self-censorship, and exit. To mitigate conflicts, it advocates for inclusive and transparent communication policies that balance institutional goals with scientific autonomy, fostering trust and ensuring that both organizations and researchers contribute effectively to public discourse.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"9636625251343507"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144175337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Indirect audiences and conflicting narratives about oral contraception: Emergent coverage of "the pill" in The New York Times, 1951-1965. 间接受众和关于口服避孕药的矛盾叙述：1951-1965年《纽约时报》对“避孕药”的紧急报道。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2025-05-23 DOI: 10.1177/09636625251336650
Robin E Jensen, Madison A Krall, Megan E Cullinan, Ghanima Almuaili
{"title":"Indirect audiences and conflicting narratives about oral contraception: Emergent coverage of \"the pill\" in <i>The New York Times</i>, 1951-1965.","authors":"Robin E Jensen, Madison A Krall, Megan E Cullinan, Ghanima Almuaili","doi":"10.1177/09636625251336650","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625251336650","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When the first oral contraceptive pill was approved in the United States in 1960, scientific information for potential users was scant. Newspapers were one of the few sources of lay pill-related content. This study offers a critical-rhetorical analysis of the earliest <i>New York Times</i> coverage of the oral contraceptive pill (<i>N</i> = 292), to assess how audiences were guided to understand and interpret this new technology. Findings reveal that, of the major news genres represented (e.g. stock, religion, and science reports), all provided indirect information about the pill for potential consumers, with conflicting news-genre-specific narratives highlighting the pill's: (a) volatility and unpredictability, (b), divisiveness and complexity, and (c) placement within the trajectory of scientific progress, respectively. Lay people interested in using the pill were not primary audiences for this coverage but were, instead, unintended or secondary audiences, and evidence of women's thoughts or professional opinions about the pill were rarely included.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"9636625251336650"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144129194","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Quality in science communication with communicative artificial intelligence: A principle-based framework. 基于沟通人工智能的科学传播质量：一个基于原则的框架。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2025-05-22 DOI: 10.1177/09636625251328854
Daniel Silva Luna, Irene Broer, Helena Bilandzic, Monika Taddicken, Björn W Schuller, Martin Bürger
{"title":"Quality in science communication with communicative artificial intelligence: A principle-based framework.","authors":"Daniel Silva Luna, Irene Broer, Helena Bilandzic, Monika Taddicken, Björn W Schuller, Martin Bürger","doi":"10.1177/09636625251328854","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625251328854","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rapid advancement of communicative artificial intelligence (ComAI) is profoundly impacting science communication, offering new opportunities for easier and more audience-oriented communication. However, it also poses several challenges for its practice. Based on a narrative review of literature on science communication and ComAI quality, this article develops a framework of quality principles for science communication with ComAI. The framework identifies the quality dimensions of scientific integrity, human-centricity, ethical responsiveness, inclusive impact, and governance. We discuss applications of this framework in technology development, practitioner training, guideline development, and quality evaluation. This work aims to foster critical discussions on the normative standards for ComAI use in this field.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"9636625251328854"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144121259","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Public views on research with publicly available data in Switzerland: Implications for digital research, science communication, and policy. 公众对瑞士公开数据研究的看法：对数字研究、科学传播和政策的影响。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2025-05-22 DOI: 10.1177/09636625251330575
Paola Daniore, Jana Sedlakova, Federica Zavattaro, Zoé Huber, Melanie Knieps, Manon Haulotte, Togbé Agbessi Alangue, Artemis Faulk, Viktor von Wyl, Yaniv Benhamou, Felix Gille
{"title":"Public views on research with publicly available data in Switzerland: Implications for digital research, science communication, and policy.","authors":"Paola Daniore, Jana Sedlakova, Federica Zavattaro, Zoé Huber, Melanie Knieps, Manon Haulotte, Togbé Agbessi Alangue, Artemis Faulk, Viktor von Wyl, Yaniv Benhamou, Felix Gille","doi":"10.1177/09636625251330575","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625251330575","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The increasing volume of publicly available data brought about by digitalization offers researchers opportunities to examine public sentiment on various national and global issues. However, concerns linked to the use of publicly available data in digital research are insufficiently addressed. To ensure its ethical and trustworthy conduct, it is crucial to assess the public's perception of digital research with publicly available data. We conducted 10 focus groups with 75 participants from the German-, French-, and Italian-speaking regions in Switzerland, reflecting nationwide perspectives on digital research with publicly available data. Through a thematic analysis, four major themes emerged: (1) expectations toward actors and digital research with publicly available data, such as alignment with research standards to promote result validity, using research findings for societal benefit, and ensuring transparency on data use through informed consent; (2) concerns about data reuse for purposes beyond the study's objectives, especially for financial gain, as well as concerns about method reliability, data quality, and privacy; (3) mitigative measures to minimize potential harm, such as through the involvement of external oversight committees; and (4) supportive measures encompassing communication strategies to raise awareness and inform the public about the use of their data for research purposes. Our findings suggest public support for digital research with publicly available data provided that specific expectations are met. Developing a framework for legitimate digital research with publicly available data is identified as a valuable next step, with a focus on broadening public awareness on digital research with publicly available data through nationwide communication campaigns and introducing relevant oversight measures to foster trust.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"9636625251330575"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144121257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Tragic Flaws and Practical Wisdom: Public reasoning behind preferences for different genetic technologies. 悲剧性缺陷与实践智慧：不同基因技术偏好背后的公众推理。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2025-05-09 DOI: 10.1177/09636625251333316
Henry G W Dixson, Catherine Waldby, Sujatha Raman, Adrian Mackenzie, Lucy Carter
{"title":"Tragic Flaws and Practical Wisdom: Public reasoning behind preferences for different genetic technologies.","authors":"Henry G W Dixson, Catherine Waldby, Sujatha Raman, Adrian Mackenzie, Lucy Carter","doi":"10.1177/09636625251333316","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625251333316","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Advanced bioengineering is often described as a transformative field with the potential to reshape aspects of society and environments. However, it remains largely unfamiliar to publics, compounded by its highly abstract and complex technical details. Increasingly, there have been calls for public engagement that grounds the field in concrete, real-world uses. Furthermore, there have been calls to move beyond the limits of archetypal or intrinsic concerns by encouraging people to flesh out and justify their support or lack thereof. This national focus group study investigated views across Australia regarding four novel applications. By presenting these technologies in contextualised scenarios incorporating characters with a range of perspectives, it answers the call for greater frame awareness. We conclude that publics are more than capable of weighing and negotiating between multiple frames at once, providing their own in order to justify whether to accept or reject one of the technologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"9636625251333316"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143988293","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Can homeopathy cure all diseases? Subgroups of homeopathy users based on beliefs about whether and how homeopathy should be used to treat serious conditions. 顺势疗法能治百病吗？基于是否以及如何使用顺势疗法治疗严重疾病的信念的顺势疗法使用者亚组。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2025-05-08 DOI: 10.1177/09636625251332524
Luisa Liekefett, Julia C Becker
{"title":"Can homeopathy cure all diseases? Subgroups of homeopathy users based on beliefs about whether and how homeopathy should be used to treat serious conditions.","authors":"Luisa Liekefett, Julia C Becker","doi":"10.1177/09636625251332524","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625251332524","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Can homeopathy cure all diseases? Depending on whom you ask, answers to this question might be very different. This research investigates what homeopathy users believe about (a) whether and how homeopathy should be used to treat serious conditions like cancer, and (b) science and the relevance of scientific evidence regarding homeopathy. Using latent profile analysis (N = 225), we identify subgroups of homeopathy users that differ in their normative beliefs about the use of homeopathy in serious conditions: supporters of standalone use of homeopathy in serious conditions (~9%), those who are open toward standalone use (~43%), supporters of supplementary use (~35%), and supporters of both supplementary use and nonuse in serious conditions (~13%). Subgroups that supported or were open toward the standalone use of homeopathy in serious conditions held the most negative attitudes toward science. These findings are relevant for interventions aiming to prevent the risks associated with homeopathy use.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"9636625251332524"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144020625","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Moral expression of "experts" and public engagement: Communicating COVID-19 vaccines on Facebook public pages in Chinese. “专家”的道德表达与公众参与：在Facebook公共页面上用中文交流COVID-19疫苗。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-24 DOI: 10.1177/09636625241310147
Yipeng Xi, Weiyu Zhang
{"title":"Moral expression of \"experts\" and public engagement: Communicating COVID-19 vaccines on Facebook public pages in Chinese.","authors":"Yipeng Xi, Weiyu Zhang","doi":"10.1177/09636625241310147","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625241310147","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This research investigates the moral frames employed by diverse Chinese-speaking \"experts\" on their Facebook public pages in relation to COVID-19 vaccines, leveraging Moral Foundations Theory for analysis. The analysis highlights that experts predominantly employ moral frames emphasizing care and authority in communicating COVID-19 vaccines. However, the moral frames of care, loyalty, and fairness are more effective in garnering public support. The research thus identifies a disparity between the moral rhetoric commonly espoused by different expert groups and the rhetoric that substantively influences public engagement. The implications of diverse experts' moral framing in public health crises are also discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"459-478"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143042401","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
A four-level model of political polarization over science: Evidence from 10 European countries. 科学政治极化的四级模型：来自10个欧洲国家的证据。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-18 DOI: 10.1177/09636625241306352
Roderik Rekker
{"title":"A four-level model of political polarization over science: Evidence from 10 European countries.","authors":"Roderik Rekker","doi":"10.1177/09636625241306352","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625241306352","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Citizens' trust in science increasingly depends on their political leaning. Structural equation models on survey data from 10 European countries (<i>N</i> = 5306) demonstrate that this <i>science polarization</i> can be captured by a model with four levels of generalization. Voters of populist parties distrust the <i>system and elite</i> in general, which indirectly fuels a broad science skepticism. At another level, right-wingers have less trust in <i>science as a whole</i> than left-wingers. After accounting for this general skepticism, left-wingers and right-wingers are, however, similarly prone to contest ideology-incongruent <i>research fields</i> and <i>specific claims</i>. These findings have three implications. First, research on science skepticism should carefully consider all four levels and their interplay. Second, the science polarization between populist and non-populist voters has fundamentally different origins than the effect of left-right ideology. Third, a four-level model can expose ideological symmetries in science rejection that have previously remained largely undetected in observational studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"424-445"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12038069/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143014193","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The gender gap in expert voices: Evidence from economics. 专家声音中的性别差异：来自经济学的证据。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-06 DOI: 10.1177/09636625241282162
Hans Henrik Sievertsen, Sarah Smith
{"title":"The gender gap in expert voices: Evidence from economics.","authors":"Hans Henrik Sievertsen, Sarah Smith","doi":"10.1177/09636625241282162","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625241282162","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In economics, as in other domains, male experts are overrepresented in public debates. The underlying reason for this is unclear. A demand-side explanation is that female experts are less frequently asked to give their opinion; a supply-side explanation is that, conditional on being asked, female experts are less willing to give their opinion. Analysing an existing panel of expert economists, all asked for their opinions on a broad range of issues, we find evidence of a supply-side gap: male panel members are more likely to give an opinion, and this is the case in all fields of economics and on both in-field and out-of-field topics.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"446-458"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142787262","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
下一页 尾页
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
相关产品
×
本文献相关产品
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