Filter by keyword: Public understanding of science and technology

Publications including this keyword are listed below.

137 publications found

Apr 14, 2025 Article

Negotiating AI(s) futures: competing imaginaries of AI by stakeholders in the US, China, and Germany

by Vanessa Richter, Christian Katzenbach and Jing Zeng

This paper examines how artificial intelligence (AI) imaginaries are negotiated by key stakeholders in the United States, China, and Germany, focusing on how public perceptions and discourses shape AI as a sociotechnical phenomenon. Drawing on the concept of sociotechnical imaginaries in public communication, the study explores how stakeholders from industry, government, academia, media and civil society actively co-construct and contest visions of the future of AI. The comparative analysis challenges the notion that national perceptions are monolithic, highlighting the complex and heterogeneous discursive processes surrounding AI. The paper utilises stakeholder interviews to analyse how different actors position themselves within these imaginaries. The analysis highlights overarching and sociopolitically diverse AI imaginaries as well as sectoral and stakeholder co-dependencies within and across the case study countries. It hence offers insights into the socio-political dynamics that influence AI’s evolving role in society, thus contributing to debates on science communication and the social construction of technology.

Volume 24 • Issue 02 • 2025 • Science Communication in the Age of Artificial Intelligence (Science Communication & AI)

Feb 24, 2025 Article

"It's mostly a one-way street, to be honest": the subjective relevance of public engagement in the science communication of professional university communicators

by Kaija Biermann, Lennart Banse and Monika Taddicken

This study explores the subjective relevance and challenges of public engagement (PES) in science communication among professional university communicators based on 29 qualitative interviews in one German federal state. Despite recognizing its value, interviewees reveal significant uncertainties in understanding, objectives, and implementation of PES. They cite barriers such as reliance on scientists and control concerns. Surprisingly, social media is rarely considered for PES, with online engagement seen as difficult. This research highlights the complexities and challenges of PES in practice, emphasizing opportunities for optimized digital science communication strategies and clearer role structures between professionals and researchers to enhance PES.

Volume 24 • Issue 01 • 2025

Dec 16, 2024 Article

Intermediaries in the limelight: how exposure to trust cues in content about science affects public trust in science

by Lars Guenther, Justin T. Schröder, Anne Reif, Janise Brück, Monika Taddicken, Peter Weingart and Evelyn Jonas

A potential decline in public trust in science has often been linked to digital media environments, which serve as intermediaries of trust by providing cues for why (not) to trust science. This study examines whether exposure to trust cues in content affects public trust in science (across population groups). The study employs a mixed-method design, combining content analysis (“n” = 906) and panel survey data (“n” = 1,030) in Germany. The findings reveal that exposure to trust cues in certain media predicts public trust in science. Variations across trust groups indicate a nuanced nature of trust-assessing processes in digital media environments.

Volume 23 • Issue 09 • 2024 • Special Issue: Public (dis)trust in science in digital media environments

Dec 16, 2024 Article

Trust in science, trust in ChatGPT? How Germans think about generative AI as a source in science communication

by Mike S. Schäfer, Bastian Kremer, Niels G. Mede and Liliann Fischer

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.

Volume 23 • Issue 09 • 2024 • Special Issue: Public (dis)trust in science in digital media environments

Dec 16, 2024 Article

“I think it gave me a little bit of mistrust”: exploring trust in COVID-19 science among college students

by Ch'Ree Essary

As the late teen and early adulthood years have been identified as a period in life where opinions regarding politics are formed, it is important to understand how the highly politicized science issue — the COVID-19 pandemic — may have influenced young adults’ trust in science and how they come to know the accuracy of science information. In order to explore these topics, this study employed a series of focus groups with college students (N = 22). Findings show that while focus group participants were largely trusting of science and science institutions, they were wary of government and politician interference in science and scientists who lack the integrity and benevolence to act in the best interests of the public.

Volume 23 • Issue 09 • 2024 • Special Issue: Public (dis)trust in science in digital media environments

Nov 18, 2024 Article

Who trusts in scientific research? Cross-national surveys of Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States

by Asako Miura, Mei Yamagata, Jin Higashijima, Toshiya Kobayashi and Masaki Nakamura

In this study, we explored science understanding and attitudes in Japan compared to the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US), examining trust in science versus humanities. Our web-based survey revealed that Japan's research literacy matches its Western counterparts. However, there were notable differences in scientific knowledge depth and public trust in research. Interestingly, higher scientific knowledge correlated with increased trust in research outcomes, a trend not seen in the humanities. In Japan, political ideologies did not significantly influence trust in science or humanities and showed little correlation with scientific knowledge or research literacy. This contrasts with the UK and the US, where political ideology impacts public trust in these fields.

Volume 23 • Issue 08 • 2024

Oct 30, 2024 Conference Review

Public Communication of Science and Technology Symposium in South Bend, Indiana, U.S.A.

by Marlit Hayslett and Maggie Fink

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.

Volume 23 • Issue 08 • 2024

Oct 21, 2024 Editorial

Engaging with discovery science: expanding the conversation within the science communication community

by Rick Borchelt

Many of us who engage with or communicate about discovery science — sometimes called curiosity-driven research or basic research — have grown increasingly concerned in recent years by the disproportionate attention to applied science, medicine, and technology, seemingly at the expense of basic science. This concern led to the creation of a joint U.S. Department of Energy-Kavli Foundation initiative, the Science Public Engagement Partnership (SciPEP) to catalyze and advance scholarship and practice specifically about communicating discovery science. This special issue is one outcome of that effort. In this issue, readers will find scholarship, practice, and thought leadership that explore the many different communication modes for sharing discovery science employed by scientists, their institutions, and the communicators who work with them. The issue also suggests ways to support basic scientists in identifying and clarifying their goals and audiences depending on what and with whom they are communicating.

Volume 23 • Issue 07 • 2024 • Special Issue: Communicating Discovery Science

Oct 21, 2024 Article

The coverage of basic and applied research in press releases on EurekAlert!

by Jingwen Zhang, Marina Joubert, Jonathan Dudek and Rodrigo Costas

Research organisations routinely reach out to the media via press releases to announce research news and promote advances in science. This paper explores the presence of basic and applied research in press releases issued through EurekAlert!. Using a scientometric approach to classify research papers featured in press releases into basic and applied research, we found that more than half of the press releases in our dataset were related to basic research. This trend was particularly notable in life and earth sciences, physical sciences, and engineering fields. In contrast, press releases in the biomedical and health sciences, as well as in social sciences and humanities, were more frequently associated with applied research. Additionally, we present findings on the similarity and readability of press releases compared to their corresponding research papers, which confirm the role of institutional press officers in making research papers more accessible to the public and media. This adaptation appears to be more pronounced for basic research.

Volume 23 • Issue 07 • 2024 • Special Issue: Communicating Discovery Science

Sep 25, 2024 Practice Insight

Communicating the uncertainties associated with genetic biocontrol approaches: insights from communicators, science journalists and scientists in Africa

by Willy Kiprotich Tonui, Dorington Ogoyi, Caroline Thuo, Cyrus Tareh, Cecilia Lubanga Alukhaba, Arouna Ouedraogo, Akoudjin Massouroudini, Amelie Wamba Ndongmo Regine, Agbonma Gloria Ogbaki, Gerald Andae, Gilbert Rotich, Andrew Kipkoech and Rosalia Omungo

Genetic biocontrol approaches, such as gene drive technology is rapidly gaining interest from scientists and public health professionals due to their potential to overcome many challenges of current malaria control tools and strategies. This is particularly the case in Africa where the burden of malaria is most significant. Uncertainty exists about whether these approaches will work, how effective they might be, who is controlling them, and potential unintended consequences for human health and the environment. Therefore, efforts to enhance the understanding of genetic engineering and biotechnology are needed, to ensure that accurate information about this technology is disseminated in the media by science communicators including the journalists and scientists. In this practice insight, we review the outcomes from workshops and courses hosted by the African Genetic Biocontrol Consortium aimed at equipping communicators and journalists with skilful techniques to proficiently articulate the uncertainties associated with genetic biocontrol interventions to the African public. we discuss the gaps and provide insight on how communicators can address some of the basic challenges of developing effective communication and decision-making for genetic biocontrol approaches in Africa.

Volume 23 • Issue 06 • 2024