We assessed ChatGPT's ability to identify and categorize actors in German news media articles into societal groups. Through three experiments, we evaluated various models and prompting strategies. In experiment 1, we found that providing ChatGPT with codebooks designed for manual content analysis was insufficient. However, combining Named Entity Recognition with an optimized prompt for actor Classification (NERC pipeline) yielded acceptable results. In experiment 2, we compared the performance of gpt-3.5-turbo, gpt-4o, and gpt-4-turbo, with the latter performing best, though challenges remained in classifying nuanced actor categories. In experiment 3, we demonstrated that repeating the classification with the same model produced highly reliable results, even across different release versions.
Filter by keyword: AI tools in science communication
-
Apr 14, 2025 Article
-
Apr 14, 2025 Essay
All Eyez on AI: a roadmap for science communication research in the age of Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is profoundly reshaping the field of science communication research. We conducted a literature review of 35 articles published between 2002 and 2024, which reveals that research on AI in science communication is still in its infancy but growing, predominantly concentrated in Western contexts, and methodologically inclined toward quantitative approaches. The field largely focuses on communication about AI and public perceptions of AI rather than analyzing actual engagement with generative AI or its systemic impact on science communication ecosystems. To address these gaps, we propose a research agenda centered on four key areas: (1) communication about AI, (2) communication with AI, (3) the impact of AI on science communication ecosystems, and (4) AI’s influence on science, theoretical and methodological approaches.
-
Apr 02, 2025 Book Review
Rethinking how we think about AI and common sense
`AI and Common Sense: Ambitions and Frictions' critically examines the claim of AI with common sense, a notion often assumed in human intelligence but highly debated in machine learning. The book offers a multifaceted exploration, questioning whether common sense is essential for AI and its broader implications for society and the future of technology. Spanning technical, philosophical, and social perspectives, it invites readers to rethink common sense and its role in shaping future AI conversations in society. -
Dec 16, 2024 Article
Trust in science, trust in ChatGPT? How Germans think about generative AI as a source in science communication
Generative AI like ChatGPT has been diagnosed to fundamentally impact different realms of life. This includes science communication, where GenAI tools are becoming important sources of science-related content for many people. This raises the question of whether people trust GenAI as a source in this field, a question that has not been answered sufficiently yet. Adapting a model developed by Roberts et al. [2013] and utilizing survey data from the German Science Barometer 2023, we find that Germans are rather sceptical about and do not strongly trust GenAI in science communication. Structural equation modelling shows that respondents' trust in GenAI as a source in science communication is driven strongly by their general trust in science, which is largely driven by their knowledge about science and the perception that science improves quality of life.
-
Oct 30, 2024 Conference Review
Public Communication of Science and Technology Symposium in South Bend, Indiana, U.S.A.
This conference review discusses the July 2024 Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST) symposium held in South Bend, Indiana, the first PCST symposium held in the United States. It reflects on speakers, topics, and logistics of the event. -
Sep 18, 2024 Essay
Evaluations in science communication. Current state and future directions
Evaluations are becoming more important in science communication. But both science communication practitioners and researchers are not sufficiently utilizing the potential of evaluations yet. In this essay, we first define four requirements for rigorous evaluations of science communication activities and projects. To substantiate our argument, we take stock of the scientific literature, uncover deficiencies in current evaluation practices and identify potential causes. We conclude with laying out how different actors in the field — including science communication practitioners, professional associations, scientific institutions and funding bodies as well as researchers — can contribute to advancing evaluation practices in science communication as well as research on it. -
Jul 22, 2024 Conference Review
#AISCICOMM24. Discussing the role of (generative) AI for science communication research and science communication practice
The annual conference of the Science Communication Division of the German Communication Association (DGPuK) was held in Zurich, Switzerland, from 5–7 June 2024. The conference attracted around 125 researchers and science communication practitioners from Europe and beyond. In this review, I provide an overview of the conference and discuss some of the challenges for researching AI in science communication as well as for science communication practice.