1887

Learning from History to Increase Positive Public Reception and Social Value Alignment of Evidence-Based Science Communication

    Author: Jason A. Tetro1,*
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: College of Biological Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    • Received 17 November 2017 Accepted 06 December 2017 Published 30 March 2018
    • ©2018 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology.
    • [open-access] This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode), which grants the public the nonexclusive right to copy, distribute, or display the published work.

    • Supplemental materials available at http://asmscience.org/jmbe
    • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: Dean’s Office, College of Biological Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada. Phone: 519-824-4120, x 52730. E-mail: jtetro@uoguelph.ca.
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. March 2018 vol. 19 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1532
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • PDF
    183.21 Kb
  • XML
    52.67 Kb
  • HTML
    46.87 Kb

    Abstract:

    For effective science communication, three general objectives should be taken into consideration: 1) accurate conveyance of the scientific evidence; 2) warm public reception of the communicator; and 3) alignment of the information with social values. An examination of both successful and failed science communication efforts over the course of history can reveal strategies to better meet these objectives. This article looks back at influential moments of science communication over the past two millennia in the context of the objectives and, using lessons learned from these events as a guide, introduces a five-element approach to improve the potential for attaining the objectives.

References & Citations

1. Kitzinger J2004Audience and readership research167182 Downing JD, McQuail D, Schlesinger PThe SAGE handbook of media studiesSAGE Publications LtdThousand Oaks, CA10.4135/9781412976077.n9 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412976077.n9
2. Dietz T2013Bringing values and deliberation to science communicationProc Natl Acad Sci110Suppl 3140811408710.1073/pnas.1212740110239403503752165 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212740110
3. Fiske ST, Dupree C2014Gaining trust as well as respect in communicating to motivated audiences about science topicsProc Natl Acad Sci111Suppl 4135931359710.1073/pnas.1317505111252253724183178 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317505111
4. Fischhoff B2013The science of science communicationProc Natl Acad Sci110Suppl 3140331403910.1073/pnas.12132731103752164 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1213273110
5. Fischhoff B, Scheufele DA2014The science of science communication IIProc Natl Acad Sci111Suppl 4135831358410.1073/pnas.1414635111252253754183180 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414635111
6. Dudo A, Besley JC2016Scientists’ prioritization of communication objectives for public engagementPLOS One112e014886710.1371/journal.pone.01488674767388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148867
7. Burns TW, O’Connor DJ, Stocklemayer SM2003Science communication: a contemporary definitionPub Underst Sci12218320210.1177/09636625030122004 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09636625030122004
8. Lucretius Carus T, Esolen AM1995On the nature of things = de rerum naturaJohns Hopkins University PressBaltimore, MD
9. Wisniak J2008Conservation of energy: readings on the origins of the first law of thermodynamics. Part IEducación química19159171
10. Schiesaro A2007Lucretius and Roman politics and history4158 Hardie P, Gillespie SThe Cambridge companion to Lucretius Cambridge Companions to LiteratureCambridge University PressCambridge, UK10.1017/CCOL9780521848015.004 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CCOL9780521848015.004
11. Copernicus N1543Nicolai Copernici Torinensis De revolvtionibvs orbium coelestiumNorimbergæ, apud IohPetreium10.5479/sil.305973.39088000648568 http://dx.doi.org/10.5479/sil.305973.39088000648568
12. Gower B1997Scientific method: an historical and philosophical introductionRoutledgeLondon, New York
13. Margolis H2002It started with Copernicus: how turning the world inside out led to the scientific revolutionMcGraw-HillNew York
14. Thomson KS, Rachootin SP1982Turning points in Darwin’s lifeBiol J Linnean Soc171233710.1111/j.1095-8312.1982.tb02011.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1982.tb02011.x
15. Darwin C1859On the origin of species by means of natural selectionJ. MurrayLondon
16. Editorial2009Darwin and cultureNature46172681173117410.1038/4611173b19865117 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/4611173b
17. Browne J2003Charles Darwin as a celebritySci Cont16117519410.1017/S0269889703000772 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0269889703000772
18. Park HJ2001The creation-evolution debate: carving creationism in the public mindPub Underst Sci10217318610.1088/0963-6625/10/2/302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/10/2/302
19. Agnew NM, Ford KM, Hayes PJ1994Expertise in context: personally constructed, socially selected, and reality-relevant?Int J Expert Syst716588
20. Pollay RW1986The distorted mirror: reflections on the unintended consequences of advertisingJ Mktg5021836
21. Fleck L1935Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache: Einf. in d. Lehre von Denkstil u. Denkkollektiv1. Aufl. edSuhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainGermany
22. Sensevy G, Tiberghien A, Santini J, Laubé S, Griggs P2008An epistemological approach to modeling: cases studies and implications for science teachingSci Educ92342444610.1002/sce.20268 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.20268
23. Wilczek F2008My wizardPhys Today23342
24. Stocklmayer SM, Rennie LJ, Gilbert JKThe roles of the formal and informal sectors in the provision of effective science educationStud Sci Educ201046114410.1080/03057260903562284 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03057260903562284
25. Potter F1987Julius Sumner Miller Phys Today40511410.1063/1.2820288 http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2820288
26. Maarschalk J1986Scientific literacy through informal science teachingEur J Sci Educ8435336010.1080/0140528860080402 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0140528860080402
27. Long M, Steinke J1996The thrill of everyday science: images of science and scientists on children’s educational science programmes in the United StatesPub Underst Sci5210111910.1088/0963-6625/5/2/002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/5/2/002
28. Gallup2017Most important problemGallup Inc.www.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx
29. Scheufele DA2014Science communication as political communicationProc Natl Acad Sci111Suppl 4135851359210.1073/pnas.1317516111252253894183176 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317516111
30. Chen GM2013Losing face on social mediaCommun Res42681983810.1177/0093650213510937 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650213510937
31. Decety J, Cowell JM2014The complex relation between morality and empathyTrends Cogn Sci18733733910.1016/j.tics.2014.04.00824972506 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.04.008
32. Gonzalez-Liencres C, Shamay-Tsoory SG, Brune M2013Towards a neuroscience of empathy: ontogeny, phylogeny, brain mechanisms, context and psychopathologyNeurosci Biobehav Rev3781537154810.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.05.00123680700 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.05.001
33. Kurtines WM, Alvarez M, Azmitia M1990Science and morality: the role of values in science and the scientific study of moral phenomenaPsychol Bull107328329510.1037/0033-2909.107.3.283 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.3.283
34. Zak PJ, Barraza JA2013The neurobiology of collective actionFront Neurosci721110.3389/fnins.2013.00211243119953832785 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2013.00211
35. Decety J, Bartal IB, Uzefovsky F, Knafo-Noam A2016Empathy as a driver of prosocial behaviour: highly conserved neurobehavioural mechanisms across speciesPhilos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci37116862015007710.1098/rstb.2015.00774685523 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0077
36. Prochazkova E, Kret ME2017Connecting minds and sharing emotions through mimicry: a neurocognitive model of emotional contagionNeurosci Biobehav Rev809911410.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.05.01328506927 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.05.013
37. Decety J2010The neurodevelopment of empathy in humansDev Neurosci32425726710.1159/000317771208056823021497 http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000317771
38. Teding van Berkhout E, Malouff JM2016The efficacy of empathy training: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trialsJ Couns Psychol631324110.1037/cou0000093 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cou0000093
39. Wundrich M, Schwartz C, Feige B, Lemper D, Nissen C, Voderholzer U2017Empathy training in medical students—a randomized controlled trialMed Teach39101096109810.1080/0142159X.2017.135545128749198 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2017.1355451
40. Chaitoff A, Sun B, Windover A, Bokar D, Featherall J, Rothberg MB, Misra-Hebert AD2017Associations between physician empathy, physician characteristics, and standardized measures of patient experienceAcad Med92101464147110.1097/ACM.000000000000167128379929 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001671
41. Gosselin E, Paul-Savoie E, Lavoie S, Bourgault P2017Evaluation of nurse empathy perceived by the standardized patient in simulation: a French validation of the Jefferson scale of patient perceptions of physician empathyJ Nurs Meas25215216110.1891/1061-3749.25.2.E15228789745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1891/1061-3749.25.2.E152
42. Hojat M, Gonnella JS, Nasca TJ, Mangione S, Vergare M, Magee M2002Physician empathy: definition, components, measurement, and relationship to gender and specialtyAm J Psychiatry15991563156910.1176/appi.ajp.159.9.156312202278 http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.159.9.1563
43. Hojat M, Gonnella JS2015Eleven years of data on the Jefferson scale of empathy—medical student version (JSE-S): proxy norm data and tentative cutoff scoresMed Princ Pract24434435010.1159/000381954259245605588243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000381954

Supplemental Material

No supplementary material available for this content.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1532
2018-03-30
2018-07-18

Abstract:

For effective science communication, three general objectives should be taken into consideration: 1) accurate conveyance of the scientific evidence; 2) warm public reception of the communicator; and 3) alignment of the information with social values. An examination of both successful and failed science communication efforts over the course of history can reveal strategies to better meet these objectives. This article looks back at influential moments of science communication over the past two millennia in the context of the objectives and, using lessons learned from these events as a guide, introduces a five-element approach to improve the potential for attaining the objectives.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/19/1/jmbe-19-41.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1532&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error