Filter by section: Article

Publications included in this section.

508 publications found

Jul 10, 2023 Article

U.S. adult viewers of information treatments express overall positive views but some concerns about gene editing technology

by Kathryn Stofer, Savanna Turner, Joy N. Rumble, Brandon McFadden, Kevin Folta, Adithi Jeevan, Tracy Ouncap, Kirsten Hecht, Cierra Cummins and Robert Thiel

Gene editing techniques (GET) may add precision and speed to the genetic improvement process. However, some adults remain skeptical. We examined U.S. consumer sentiment and concerns about foods derived from GET following information treatments. Randomly assigned participants viewed either: an industry-based video, a food blogger video, or a written article. We coded sentiment and themes of open-ended survey responses. Most responses were in favor of GET after intervention; the industry video produced the most negative attitudes; and technical benefits, concerns, and effects emerged among themes. Our research will help design engagement to boost consumer understanding of GET risks and benefits.

Volume 22 • Issue 04 • 2023

Jun 26, 2023 Article

Street art as a vehicle for environmental science communication

by Blake Thompson, Anna-Sophie Jürgens, BOHIE and Rod Lamberts

Street art is visual art in public spaces — public art — created for public visibility. Street art addresses a massive and extremely diverse audience: everyone in a city. Using a case study approach, this article explores: 1) the extent to which science-inspired environmental street art can be considered a vehicle for science communication in less tangible science contexts and institutional settings — on the street — and 2) the strategies that street artists deploy to communicate their environmental messages through large-scale painted murals. This article clarifies how street art can be understood as a means of creative grassroots environmental communication. It shows that, and how, street art can encourage agency in pro-environmentalism and help to develop our relationship with sustainability.

Volume 22 • Issue 04 • 2023

Jun 20, 2023 Article

Reflecting on four Living Labs in the Netherlands and Indonesia: a perspective on performance, public engagement and participation

by Loes Witteveen, Jan Fliervoet, Dwina Roosmini, Paul van Eijk and Nurdahlia Lairing

Living Labs need to improve their performance to address urgent social and environmental sustainability challenges. A framework combining the dimensions of environment and focus, methods and collaborative action, and outcomes with a life cycle perspective allowed analysing four Living Labs in the Netherlands and Indonesia. These Living Labs present differences in environment but are similar for the focus on sustainability transition processes. The reflection reveals the importance of considering public engagement and participation needed to foster a responsible approach and a sustainable performance of Living Labs.

Volume 22 • Issue 03 • 2023 • Special Issue: Living labs under construction: paradigms, practices, and perspectives of public science communication and participatory science

Jun 20, 2023 Article

Living labs contributions to smart cities from a quadruple-helix perspective

by Daniel Esashika, Gilmar Masiero and Yohann Mauger

This paper explores living labs' contributions to smart cities from a quadruple-helix perspective. The selected exploratory case studies (Living Lab Florianópolis, Living Lab of the Itaipu Technological Park and Porto Digital) depict an institutional context characterized by a low interaction between the quadruple-helix components. The data were obtained through document analysis and interviews with living lab organizers and participants. The results suggest living labs can contribute by a) selecting the most promising projects to promote, b) connecting several agents and sharing informational through collaborative practices and events, c) facilitating mediation between participants in living labs and government agencies, universities and local companies to conduct tests, and d) inserting the fourth helix as a tester but not as a co-creator. These findings explain the participation of quadruple-helix components in the stages of project selection, development, and testing developing living labs. Finally, this article contradicts the predominant notion that living labs remain based on user-oriented innovation processes, purporting a producer-oriented trajectory.

Volume 22 • Issue 03 • 2023 • Special Issue: Living labs under construction: paradigms, practices, and perspectives of public science communication and participatory science

Jun 20, 2023 Article

Co-creativity in Living Labs: fostering creativity in co-creation processes to transform food systems

by Sonia Massari, Francesca Galli, Dalia Mattioni and Yuna Chiffoleau

In this article, the authors aim to reflect on the relationship between collaborative creation and creativity ('co-creativity') within Living Lab (LL) research and innovation in the domain of agri-food systems.While the value of LL is often perceived to be the collaboration among its participants, there is a need to capture and measure the process of co-creation.Co-creativity is indicated by the literature to be a necessary research and collaborative component of social change, as well as for promoting a transformative sustainability agenda.This article uses empirical and primary data collected in the context of the DIVINFOOD project to show the extent to which researchers actively promote, manage and respond to the effects of collaborative creativity within their research. Collaborative creativity is an indispensable component of the co-creation process because it supports collaborative learning. The authors conclude that measuring co-creativity could be an interesting indicator to monitor the development of LLs over time.

Volume 22 • Issue 03 • 2023 • Special Issue: Living labs under construction: paradigms, practices, and perspectives of public science communication and participatory science

Jun 20, 2023 Article

Living Lab, interrupted? Exploring new methods for postdigital exchange on WeChat with urban-rural Living Labs in China and Germany during COVID-19

by Kit Braybrooke, Gaoli Xiao and Ava Lynam

This paper explores the possibilities of a two-phase postdigital ethnographic method for engaging with Living Labs in difficult-to-access physical fields. Our WeChat photo exchange group, ‘URA 照片分享群’, was prototyped through two experimentation rounds, in which participants of 3 Living Labs in China and Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic exchanged photos and insights about their everyday experiences. The approach was revealed to be an efficient tool to build rapport with field informants and gain impressions of local socio-spatial practices, while also challenged by trust-building, biases, and research ethics. We conclude with four design principles for future studies with participants in Living Labs where physical co-location is not possible.

Volume 22 • Issue 03 • 2023 • Special Issue: Living labs under construction: paradigms, practices, and perspectives of public science communication and participatory science

Jun 20, 2023 Article

The lab, the space and the meetup: locating technological experimentation in everyday life

by Andreas Hepp

This article analyzes the role digital pioneer communities play in the localization of everyday technological experimentation based on three sites of practice: the lab, the space, and the meetup. Taking a historical view, it begins with a reconstruction of Stewart Brand’s popularization of the lab discourse. On this basis, the space in the Maker movement as well as the meetup in the Quantified Self and Hacks/Hackers movements is investigated, finally arriving at a reflection on the dynamics that come and go between them. While the article is primarily a conceptual contribution, its arguments are grounded in an extensive media ethnography.

Volume 22 • Issue 03 • 2023 • Special Issue: Living labs under construction: paradigms, practices, and perspectives of public science communication and participatory science

May 22, 2023 Article

Ups and downs on “r/science” — exploring the dynamics of science communication on Reddit

by Jonas Kaiser, Birte Fähnrich and Laura Heintz

This exploratory study analyzed user-generated science communication on Reddit from May 2007 to October 2018 (n = 694.147 posts). We used automated content analyses and topic modelling to explore patterns that the user-generated communication exhibits. Results indicate that science communication on r/science refers to a broad range of different topics and disciplines. Specific upvote features of Reddit result in increased attention to sources and topics. Especially, social media sources and content that is self-referential to Reddit lead to high controversy in discussions.

Volume 22 • Issue 02 • 2023

May 15, 2023 Article

Diversifying citizen science through the inclusion of young people

by Natasha Louise Constant and Joelene Hughes

The study presents findings on motivations, barriers and recommendations that enhance youth engagement in citizen science particularly, those with no prior citizen science experience. We conducted focus groups targeting young people with and without citizen science experience. Qualitative findings identify a range of motivations including career development, new interests and knowledge, altruistic values, social interactions, inclusivity and connections to new places and nature. Several barriers were identified including logistical constraints, lack of knowledge and interest, programmatic and organisational issues. We discuss the implications of our findings to broaden the diversity of citizen scientists toward a younger demographic.

Volume 22 • Issue 02 • 2023

May 08, 2023 Article

The reported effects of neuroscience literacy and belief in neuromyths among parents of adolescents

by Ilona M. B. Benneker, Nikki C. Lee, Sibel Altikulaç, Chiel van der Veen, Lydia Krabbendam and Nienke van Atteveldt

Neuroscience research has increased our understanding of brain development, but little is known about how parents of adolescents engage with this neuroscientific information. Dutch parents completed a digital survey on neuromyths, neuroscience literacy and views of the adolescent brain and behaviour. These parents believed 44.7% of neuromyths and showed reasonable neuroscience literacy (79.8%). Stronger neuromyth belief predicted a more negative view on adolescent brain development. About 68% of the parents reported that they had changed their parenting behaviour based on their understanding of neuroscientific findings. These self-reported changes most often reflected changes to parents' own behaviour. The results of this study underline the importance for scientists and parents to engage in scientific activities to promote respectful and trusting relationships between them. These relationships have the potential to make communication about adolescent brain development between scientists and parents more effective and will empower parents to use correct information as a basis for their decisions around raising their adolescents.

Volume 22 • Issue 02 • 2023