Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Audiences for Science
Thinking Analytically About Audiences
Susanna Priest, Ph.D.Editor, Science Communication
Visiting Scholar, University of Washington
What happens when science leaves journals? Most people only know science from media reports,
including advertising Science news is heavily subsidized by institutions
Consumers of this information must evaluate competing claims This includes consumers of products, from cell phones to cars
and from foods to pharmaceuticals Making journals more public may be inherently valuable,
but will not solve issues of how people go about this – new skills needed as the influence of traditional journalism recedes
Democratization of science, also an inherent good, requires new levels of audience sophistication
Significant literature on how people process risk information, for example – it’s a complex picture!
Five Attitudinal Audiences for Nano-Science (just an example, from student survey/Priest and Greenhalgh 2012)
Science Friendly (familiar with S&T, trust scientists, economic conservatives, want policy based on sci)
Science Unfriendly (not familiar, distrust scientists, social conservatives, do not want policy based on science)
Moralists (want national policy based on moral principles, social conservatives)
Cynics (not social conservatives, distrust many sources of authority)
Environmentalists (distrust religious leaders, not either type of conservative, trust scientists and environmentalists, want sci-based policy)
ONLY ONE OF MANY WAYS TO VIEW AUDIENCES! These are varied along many dimensions. Bottom line: People bring pre-existing attitudes to the
interpretation of scientific claims.
Who is interested in science, after all? Scientists and others who work in science People who make decisions about science – policy
makers, politicians, regulators, investors, consumer advocates, and environmentalists
People who just think science is “cool” (or, well, not)!
People who must make a decision where science is crucial – due to medical necessity, local environmental issues, etc.
Everybody else!
What is science literacy, really? Traditionally measured on basis of
multiple choice tests of knowledge Some items controversial as “knowledge”
measures, e.g., evolution Statistics on factual scientific knowledge
are not reassuring (e.g., Miller) What people really need to know to make
sense of claims about science is something quite different…
“Critical science literacy” = sociology and philosophy of science (101) What audiences really need to know is less about
facts and more about “how science works” Science is a highly social activity – role of
scientific meetings, nature of scientific consensus, and role/purpose of peer review
A variety of methods are in use, not just experiments (as in high school lab class) but modeling, surveying, description, etc.
Science is undoubtedly subject to political and ideological influences of which we should be aware – and yet still the best knowledge we have!
Uncertainty and probabilistic conclusions are inevitable, not a “failing” of science
Two plugs!
