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
Gene editing in animals: What does the public want to know and what information do stakeholder organizations provide? 动物基因编辑：公众想知道什么，利益相关组织提供了哪些信息？
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-07 DOI: 10.1177/09636625241227091
Christine Kuo, Katherine E Koralesky, Marina A G von Keyserlingk, Daniel M Weary
{"title":"Gene editing in animals: What does the public want to know and what information do stakeholder organizations provide?","authors":"Christine Kuo, Katherine E Koralesky, Marina A G von Keyserlingk, Daniel M Weary","doi":"10.1177/09636625241227091","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625241227091","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Organizations involved with gene editing may engage with the public to share information and address concerns about the technology. It is unclear, however, if the information shared aligns with what people want to know. We aimed to understand what members of the public want to know about gene editing in animals by soliciting their questions through an open-ended survey question and comparing them with questions posed in Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) webpages developed by gene editing stakeholder organizations. Participants (338 USA residents) asked the most questions about gene editing in general and animal welfare. In contrast, FAQ webpages focused on regulations. The questions survey participants asked demonstrate a range of knowledge and interests. The discrepancy between survey participant questions and the information provided in the FAQ webpages suggests that gene editing stakeholders might engage in more meaningful public engagement by soliciting actual questions from the public and opening up opportunities for real dialogue.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"725-739"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11290030/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139703775","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
Complexity appreciated: How the communication of complexity impacts topic-specific intellectual humility and epistemic trustworthiness. 欣赏复杂性：复杂性的传播如何影响特定主题的知识谦逊性和认识论可信度。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-15 DOI: 10.1177/09636625241227800
Nina Vaupotič, Dorothe Kienhues, Regina Jucks
{"title":"Complexity appreciated: How the communication of complexity impacts topic-specific intellectual humility and epistemic trustworthiness.","authors":"Nina Vaupotič, Dorothe Kienhues, Regina Jucks","doi":"10.1177/09636625241227800","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625241227800","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the context of science communication, complexity is often reduced. This study employs a 2 × 2 experimental design (<i>N</i> = 432) to investigate how two factors, namely the communication of complexity (reduced vs not reduced) and the provision of suggestions for concrete action (suggested vs not suggested), influence individuals' productive engagement with the socio-scientific topic of sustainable energy. Measured variables include topic-specific intellectual humility, judgements of source trustworthiness, willingness to act, anxiety, and hope. As expected, communication of complexity led to higher topic-specific intellectual humility, higher epistemic trustworthiness and higher anxiety. When a concrete action was communicated, participants reported lower topic-specific intellectual humility. Participants' willingness to act was not significantly affected by the experimental manipulation. The results of the study imply that the communication of complexity does not hinder people's productive engagement with science.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"740-756"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11290028/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139742358","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
When evidence changes: Communicating uncertainty protects against a loss of trust. 当证据发生变化时：沟通不确定性，防止失去信任。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-27 DOI: 10.1177/09636625241228449
Charlotte Dries, Michelle McDowell, Felix G Rebitschek, Christina Leuker
{"title":"When evidence changes: Communicating uncertainty protects against a loss of trust.","authors":"Charlotte Dries, Michelle McDowell, Felix G Rebitschek, Christina Leuker","doi":"10.1177/09636625241228449","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625241228449","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Scientific findings can be overturned when new evidence arises. This study examines how communicating and explaining uncertainty around scientific findings affect trust in the communicator when findings change. In an online experiment (<i>N</i> = 800, convenience sample), participants read a fictitious statement from a public health authority announcing that there was no link between a new COVID-19 vaccine and heart muscle inflammation. The authority communicated (1) no uncertainty, (2) uncertainty without giving a reason, (3) uncertainty due to imprecision, or (4) uncertainty due to incomplete accounting of patients. Participants were then informed that the authority's statement was no longer correct as new data showed a link between the vaccine and heart muscle inflammation. Participants rated the authority's trustworthiness before and after the evidence update. Our findings indicate that communicating uncertainty buffers against a loss of trust when evidence changes. Moreover, explaining uncertainty does not appear to harm trust.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"777-794"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139984221","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
Science popularisation as diffusion of knowledge? 科学普及是知识的传播？
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-06 DOI: 10.1177/09636625241246085
Plamena Panayotova
{"title":"Science popularisation as diffusion of knowledge?","authors":"Plamena Panayotova","doi":"10.1177/09636625241246085","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625241246085","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article offers an in-depth analysis of the diffusion model of science popularisation. It reviews criticisms against the model and shows that they do not warrant its rejection. It argues that the diffusion model has elements, hitherto neglected, which can facilitate a better understanding of popularisation. Viewing popularisation as the diffusion of knowledge is beneficial because it enables us to: (1) pinpoint the origins of popularisation and trace its historical continuity; (2) explain <i>why</i> science requires continuous popularisation; (3) understand why the values that popularisers promote are not arbitrary; and (4) define more precisely the role of popularisers.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"676-691"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141285062","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
Who is at risk of bias? Examining dispositional differences in motivated science reception. 谁有可能出现偏差？研究科学接受动机的性格差异。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-07-31 DOI: 10.1177/09636625241262611
Marlene Sophie Altenmüller, Laura Amelie Poppe
{"title":"Who is at risk of bias? Examining dispositional differences in motivated science reception.","authors":"Marlene Sophie Altenmüller, Laura Amelie Poppe","doi":"10.1177/09636625241262611","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625241262611","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The motivated reception of science in line with one's preexisting convictions is a well-documented, pervasive phenomenon. In two studies (<i>N</i> = 743), we investigated whether this bias might be stronger in some people than others due to dispositional differences. Building on the assumptions that motivated science reception is driven by perceived threat and suspicion and higher under perceived ambiguity and uncertainty, we focused on traits associated with such perceptions. In particular, we tested the impact of conspiracy mentality and victim sensitivity on motivated science reception (as indicated by ascriptions of researchers' trustworthiness and evidence credibility). In addition, we explored the role of broader personality traits (generalized mistrust and ambiguity intolerance) in this context. None of the investigated dispositions modulated the motivated science reception effect. This demonstrates once again, that motivated science reception is a ubiquitous challenge for the effective dissemination of science and everyone seems to be at risk of it.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"9636625241262611"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141856801","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
Self-serving beliefs about science: Science justifies my weaknesses (but not other people's). 自以为是的科学信仰：科学能证明我的弱点是合理的（但不能证明别人的弱点是合理的）。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-07-30 DOI: 10.1177/09636625241261320
Francisco Cruz, André Mata
{"title":"Self-serving beliefs about science: Science justifies my weaknesses (but not other people's).","authors":"Francisco Cruz, André Mata","doi":"10.1177/09636625241261320","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625241261320","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This research explored the strategic beliefs that people have about science and the extent to which it can explain moral and immoral behaviors. Although people do not believe that science is able to explain certain aspects of their mind, they might nevertheless accept a scientific explanation for their immoral behaviors if that explanation is exculpatory. In a first study, participants reflected on moral and immoral deeds that they performed or that other people performed. Participants were somewhat skeptic that science can account for people's behavior-<i>except</i> for when they reflected on the wrongdoings that they committed. Two further studies suggest that strategic belief in science arises because it enables external attributions for the behavior, outside of the wrongdoers' control. Implications are discussed for science understanding and communication.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"9636625241261320"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141793801","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 systematic literature review of the 'commercialisation effect' on public attitudes towards biobank and genomic data repositories. 关于 "商业化效应 "对公众对生物库和基因组数据储存库的态度的系统性文献综述。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-22 DOI: 10.1177/09636625241230864
Jarrod Walshe, Brad Elphinstone, Dianne Nicol, Mark Taylor
{"title":"A systematic literature review of the 'commercialisation effect' on public attitudes towards biobank and genomic data repositories.","authors":"Jarrod Walshe, Brad Elphinstone, Dianne Nicol, Mark Taylor","doi":"10.1177/09636625241230864","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625241230864","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Initiatives that collect and share genomic data to advance health research are widespread and accelerating. Commercial interests in these efforts, while vital, may erode public trust and willingness to provide personal genomic data, upon which these initiatives depend. Understanding public attitudes towards providing genomic data for health research in the context of commercial involvement is critical. A PRISMA-guided search of six online academic databases identified 113 quantitative and qualitative studies using primary data pertaining to public attitudes towards commercial actors in the management, collection, access, and use of biobank and genomic data. The presence of commercial interests yields interrelated public concerns around consent, privacy and data security, trust in science and scientists, benefit sharing, and the ownership and control of health data. Carefully considered regulatory and data governance and access policies are therefore required to maintain public trust and support for genomic health initiatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"548-567"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11264570/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139933595","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
Who are the publics engaging in AI? 谁是参与人工智能的公众？
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-28 DOI: 10.1177/09636625231219853
Renée Sieber, Ana Brandusescu, Abigail Adu-Daako, Suthee Sangiambut
{"title":"Who are the publics engaging in AI?","authors":"Renée Sieber, Ana Brandusescu, Abigail Adu-Daako, Suthee Sangiambut","doi":"10.1177/09636625231219853","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625231219853","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Given the importance of public engagement in governments' adoption of artificial intelligence systems, artificial intelligence researchers and practitioners spend little time reflecting on who those publics are. Classifying publics affects assumptions and affordances attributed to the publics' ability to contribute to policy or knowledge production. Further complicating definitions are the publics' role in artificial intelligence production and optimization. Our structured analysis of the corpus used a mixed method, where algorithmic generation of search terms allowed us to examine approximately 2500 articles and provided the foundation to conduct an extensive systematic literature review of approximately 100 documents. Results show the multiplicity of ways publics are framed, by examining and revealing the different semantic nuances, affordances, political and expertise lenses, and, finally, a lack of definitions. We conclude that categorizing publics represents an act of power, politics, and truth-seeking in artificial intelligence.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"634-653"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11264545/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139571642","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
Who is responsible? US Public perceptions of AI governance through the lenses of trust and ethics. 谁该负责？从信任和道德角度看美国公众对人工智能治理的看法。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-07 DOI: 10.1177/09636625231224592
Prabu David, Hyesun Choung, John S Seberger
{"title":"Who is responsible? US Public perceptions of AI governance through the lenses of trust and ethics.","authors":"Prabu David, Hyesun Choung, John S Seberger","doi":"10.1177/09636625231224592","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625231224592","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The governance of artificial intelligence (AI) is an urgent challenge that requires actions from three interdependent stakeholders: individual citizens, technology corporations, and governments. We conducted an online survey (<i>N</i> = 525) of US adults to examine their beliefs about the governance responsibility of these stakeholders as a function of trust and AI ethics. Different dimensions of trust and different ethical concerns were associated with beliefs in governance responsibility of the three stakeholders. Specifically, belief in the governance responsibility of the government was associated with ethical concerns about AI, whereas belief in governance responsibility of corporations was related to both ethical concerns and trust in AI. Belief in governance responsibility of individuals was related to human-centered values of trust in AI and fairness. Overall, the findings point to the need for an interdependent framework in which citizens, corporations, and governments share governance responsibilities, guided by trust and ethics as the guardrails.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"654-672"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139703777","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
Delineating between scientism and science enthusiasm: Challenges in measuring scientism and the development of novel scale. 科学主义与科学热情之间的界限：衡量科学主义的挑战与新量表的开发。
IF 3.5 2区 文学
Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-31 DOI: 10.1177/09636625231217900
Petar Lukić, Iris Žeželj
{"title":"Delineating between scientism and science enthusiasm: Challenges in measuring scientism and the development of novel scale.","authors":"Petar Lukić, Iris Žeželj","doi":"10.1177/09636625231217900","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09636625231217900","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Scientism proposes science to be an all-powerful human enterprise, able to answer not only all practical but also philosophical or moral questions. We are taking a psychological approach to scientism, studying uncritical trust in science and uncritical trust in scientists as a part of a unique attitudinal tendency. Our novel measure assesses both kinds of trust through short Thurstone scales allowing us to establish a clear threshold for endorsing scientism, thus effectively delineating it from science enthusiasm, which previous instruments were unable to do. We built and refined a novel scale through five stages in which we consulted relevant literature, experts, and laypeople. We demonstrated that uncritical trust in science and scientists are interrelated, yet distinct constructs. As expected, these two subscales positively correlated with dogmatism, scientific knowledge, and overclaiming, but not with knowledge overestimation. The results suggest the new instrument is reliable, valid, and suitable for the lay public.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"568-586"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139075481","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
首页 上一页 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