Search

This paper explores gender representations in Australian print and online science news over a period of five years. Using a constructed year method, stories relating to any science, technology, engineering, mathematics or health and medicine related theme were collected and analysed to better understand who writes and speaks about these topics. In contrast to earlier studies, the findings show near gender parity of journalists and a higher proportion of women used as direct sources. However, men were still more frequently used as direct sources, even in disciplines dominated by women. Journalist gender does appear to relate to the source gender. This paper proposes actions that journalists, organisations and science communicators can take to increase the diversity of sources presented in science news, recognising that gender is only one small part of the picture and future explorations should adopt an intersectional lens.

This book on philosophy of science and public policy provides a clear introduction to the basics of philosophy of science — scientific methodology, evidence types, and values in science. However, it falls short as an introduction to philosophy of public policy. The review contends that philosophy of public policy comprises two subdisciplines: philosophy of science and political philosophy. The book notably lacks engagement with many key figures in both areas, including Nancy Cartwright and Jonathan Wolff, and lacks treatment of evidence-based policy literature. The book functions adequately as an introductory philosophy of science text but inadequately addresses the unique problematics of evidence-informed policymaking.

The United States population reports significant hesitance to consume GMOs. This article examines whether visual food cues can change attitudes, induce attitude ambivalence, and alter intentions to avoid purchasing GMOs. In a between-subjects experiment that varied the imagery cue (positive vs. coactive vs. no cue) accompanying GMO information, participants were randomly assigned to view a news-style article about GMO foods. Overall, positive visual food cues decreased potential ambivalence, resulting in lower felt ambivalence and lower likelihood to avoid GMOs. However, skeptics and uncertain individuals were not significantly affected by visual food cues. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Different commentators are often invited in the media in order to discuss medical and health-related advances, such as the deployment of new vaccines or prevention tests. How do the expertise and opinions of such intermediaries affect public trust towards them? Do these factors also influence the public beliefs and decisions regarding those medical advances? We presented to 1984 French participants new (fictitious) medical tools that have been recently made available and commented on by individuals of different degrees of expertise and having distinct opinions. The results indicate that both factors significantly influenced participants' trust in the commentator's message. The commentator's opinion also affected (although to a smaller extent) the public attitude towards the tool and their willingness to use it. Crucially, participants recognized that commentators' assertiveness in expressing their opinions might unduly bias their beliefs. The study highlights the importance of considering both para-verbal and contextual cues in health communication, advocating for strategies to mitigate (or better use) their influence on public trust, beliefs, and decision-making.

Public engagement with science has gained institutional prominence while remaining conceptually fragmented and difficult to operationalise. This review evaluates Public Engagement with Science by Angela Potochnik and Melissa Jacquart as a field-level intervention addressing this condition. The book offers an interdisciplinary, pedagogically grounded framework for understanding, designing, and institutionalising public engagement. More steps regarding its theorization can be made, but the plentitude of strengths lies in conceptual integration and practical design.

The first World Conference of Science Journalists held in Africa was characterised by a conceptual focus on framing science journalism as a social justice practice. This reflection examines how the event interrogated the profession's role within a fractured global order. By foregrounding equity and accountability, WCSJ 2025 served as a renewal moment for the global community, challenging the field to move beyond scientific translation toward critical engagement in an era of systemic crisis.

The PCST Symposium 2025, held in Tokyo from 11–13 November, marked the first PCST-related event hosted in Japan. The symposium explored the strategic development of science communication in Asia, focusing on education and training, as well as public engagement. Navigating challenges such as linguistic diversity, limited professional development, and underrepresentation in Western discourse, Asian science communicators are harnessing new platforms and networks to expand local engagement and international impact through culturally rooted narratives.

Public attitudes toward genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Kenya remain mixed due to limited knowledge, policy gaps, and cultural factors. Despite the 2020 commercialisation of Bt cotton, perceptions of GM technologies are largely unfavourable. This study surveyed 416 respondents across 14 counties to assess awareness and knowledge levels of GMOs. Results showed 49% support GMOs, 27% are uncertain, and 24% oppose them. Misconceptions persist, with 49.3% citing size and 22.4% recognising labelling as a means of identifying GMOs. Awareness of GMO commercialisation was low (24%), though nearly half correctly identified Bt cotton as an approved GMO, and 32.7% unaware of any institution carrying out GM research. Education significantly influenced acceptance ($\chi^2$ = 68.322, p 0.001). Radio was the most trusted information source (29.3%), and scientists were the most credible (46.4%). The findings underscore the need for targeted public communication strategies to address misinformation and enhance understanding of biosafety and biotechnology in Kenya.

I was invited by my colleagues, Leßmöllmann and Medvecky, to participate in a set of commentaries on the role of science communication in the post-truth era, which will be published in the Journal of Science Communication. My reflection will focus on how reshaping and promoting official or governmental science communication could help minimise the impact of misinformation on science-related issues, such as climate change, vaccines and artificial intelligence, among others, in the public sphere. Although European and Western governments have increasingly embraced the integration of science communication as a structural and ethical component of their public information strategies, these efforts have mainly centred on fostering dissemination practices led by individual researchers or research teams. However, this approach often overlooks the equally critical role of institutional communication systems, which are incapable of translating scientific knowledge into clear, accessible and actionable information for the broader public. This omission becomes particularly salient during crises when citizens actively seek guidance grounded in scientific evidence and are frequently met with institutional silence, ambiguity or poorly coordinated messaging.

Authoritarian populism as a political system is on the global rise. In (what was) Bolsonaro's Brazil, Orbán's Hungary, or Trump's U.S., it yielded or yields a communicative ecosystem loosening ties with truthfulness and challenging a common ground that science has epistemic authority. In our paper we argue that the declining role of truth as a compass in public discourse and decision-making notable in what were seen as stable democracies poses challenges for the way we do science communication and how we do it on a very fundamental level. We suggest there is a need to reconsider assumptions about “good science communication”, and we suggest that science communication should not ignore the fact that both knowledge and communication are inescapably intertwined with power. Specifically, the power play here is about epistemic authority, sometimes even aspired dominance: who gets to have a say over what is considered knowledge? Importantly, this power play is not, in the current environment, being played collaboratively; it is competitive. “How to communicate science” is not the main issue for communicators anymore, but how to create a communicative environment where people listen at all and might consider a scientifically based argument without, from the onset, dismissing it as “woke”, or “unfree”. In this paper, we argue that science communicators should factor in the strategic interactions that inherently exist in the communicative ecosystem. As a framework to help communicators to analyze these interactions and develop decision-making options, we draw on game theory, a branch of rational choice theory that studies strategic interactions where outcomes depend on the choices of all actors involved. Following this logic, we argue that science communication as a field and set of practices could be empowered by using game theory, and we spell out what this might mean.