科学传播研究与实践议程

IF 9.1 1区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
James N. Druckman, Kirsten M. Ellenbogen, Dietram A. Scheufele, Itzhak Yanovitzky
{"title":"科学传播研究与实践议程","authors":"James N. Druckman, Kirsten M. Ellenbogen, Dietram A. Scheufele, Itzhak Yanovitzky","doi":"10.1073/pnas.2400932122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Science should not unilaterally dictate individuals’ decisions or public policies. Yet, it provides a vital source of information for societies and individuals that can often improve outcomes and well-being. This requires, however, the effective communication of scientific information. We identify two paradigms for science communication. One focuses on dissemination, often seeking to inform, reframe, or correct beliefs. Another emphasizes participation and engagement with the goal of improving public understanding of science and scientists’ understanding of the public’s concerns, needs, and values. We argue that participatory approaches better address contemporary challenges concerning scientific uncertainty, politicized science, artificial value neutrality, and a reactive science communication infrastructure. These approaches though need to move away from transactional partnerships toward more cocreation and coproduction of knowledge. They also need to focus more on less motivated and/or engaged populations. Investment in a participatory infrastructure is crucial given that even the most path-breaking science only matters if it can be adequately communicated to relevant stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":20548,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An agenda for science communication research and practice\",\"authors\":\"James N. Druckman, Kirsten M. Ellenbogen, Dietram A. Scheufele, Itzhak Yanovitzky\",\"doi\":\"10.1073/pnas.2400932122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Science should not unilaterally dictate individuals’ decisions or public policies. Yet, it provides a vital source of information for societies and individuals that can often improve outcomes and well-being. This requires, however, the effective communication of scientific information. We identify two paradigms for science communication. One focuses on dissemination, often seeking to inform, reframe, or correct beliefs. Another emphasizes participation and engagement with the goal of improving public understanding of science and scientists’ understanding of the public’s concerns, needs, and values. We argue that participatory approaches better address contemporary challenges concerning scientific uncertainty, politicized science, artificial value neutrality, and a reactive science communication infrastructure. These approaches though need to move away from transactional partnerships toward more cocreation and coproduction of knowledge. They also need to focus more on less motivated and/or engaged populations. Investment in a participatory infrastructure is crucial given that even the most path-breaking science only matters if it can be adequately communicated to relevant stakeholders.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20548,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2400932122\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2400932122","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

科学不应该单方面支配个人的决定或公共政策。然而,它为社会和个人提供了一个重要的信息来源,往往可以改善结果和福祉。然而,这需要科学信息的有效交流。我们确定了科学传播的两种范式。一种侧重于传播,通常寻求告知、重塑或纠正信念。另一种强调参与和参与,目的是提高公众对科学的理解,以及科学家对公众关注的问题、需求和价值观的理解。我们认为,参与式方法更好地解决了科学不确定性、科学政治化、人为价值中立和被动科学传播基础设施等当代挑战。然而,这些方法需要从事务性伙伴关系转向更多的共同创造和共同生产知识。他们还需要更多地关注积极性和/或参与度较低的人群。对参与性基础设施的投资至关重要,因为即使是最具开创性的科学,也只有在能够充分传达给相关利益攸关方的情况下才有意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An agenda for science communication research and practice
Science should not unilaterally dictate individuals’ decisions or public policies. Yet, it provides a vital source of information for societies and individuals that can often improve outcomes and well-being. This requires, however, the effective communication of scientific information. We identify two paradigms for science communication. One focuses on dissemination, often seeking to inform, reframe, or correct beliefs. Another emphasizes participation and engagement with the goal of improving public understanding of science and scientists’ understanding of the public’s concerns, needs, and values. We argue that participatory approaches better address contemporary challenges concerning scientific uncertainty, politicized science, artificial value neutrality, and a reactive science communication infrastructure. These approaches though need to move away from transactional partnerships toward more cocreation and coproduction of knowledge. They also need to focus more on less motivated and/or engaged populations. Investment in a participatory infrastructure is crucial given that even the most path-breaking science only matters if it can be adequately communicated to relevant stakeholders.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.00
自引率
0.90%
发文量
3575
审稿时长
2.5 months
期刊介绍: The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a peer-reviewed journal of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), serves as an authoritative source for high-impact, original research across the biological, physical, and social sciences. With a global scope, the journal welcomes submissions from researchers worldwide, making it an inclusive platform for advancing scientific knowledge.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信