PUBLIC COMMUNICATION OF SCIENCE AS PRESENTED IN THE INTERNATIONAL RESEARCHERS’ WORKS (IN THE GLOBAL DATABASE PROQUEST DISSERTATIONS & THESES)
Abstract
Science communication or communication of science and society has become very important in 21stcentury because of a ever-growing role of science and technology in people's lives. People themselves have in turn increasingly been engaged in science and technology decision-making.
Science communication has been researched abroad for several decades, became meanwhile an independent field of study of which dissertations and thesis are a part. This article describes the collection of international doctoral dissertations included in the world's most comprehensive repository ProQuest Dissertation & Theses Global (PQDT).
aking into consideration the global terminology controversy and the lack of a unified definition of "science communication", the first stage of study was a combined keyword search using the search terms selected from the PQDT index: attitudes towards science, citizen science, popularization of science, post normal science, public engagement with science, public understanding of science, science communication, scientific literacy. The search resulted in 2213 dissertations written in 1950–2022 in 11 languages from 19 countries.
Further analysis showed that the most active research is being carried out in the USA, China and the UK. 77 % of the works were written in English, 22 % in Chinese. The first works dated back to the 1950s, but an an exponential increase in the number of dissertations began only in the 1980s and could be explained by a new policy making formulated in many countries in the second half of the 1980s to ensure developing and improving science communication
At the second stage, another search was carried out for each term separately to have a picture of trends. It is revealed that until the early 2000s the main dissertation topic were attitude towards science and scientific literacy. In the 2000s, such developing topics as public engagement with science, citizen science, and post-normal science reflected the changing nature of science communication and the transition from the one-way communication model “from scientists to public” to models of public participation and engagement.
Since the 2010s, research interests have being shifted to public engagement and new ways of scientists and non-scientists interaction. One of the most actively developing directions is the co-production of knowledge aka citizen science, but the problem of scientific literacy also still remains relevant.
Acknowledgments: The article is presented within the State Public Scientific and Technical Library of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences research project "The current state and trends in the development of communications between Russian science and society", code – FWZE-2022-0012; registration number in the GC – 1021053106841-4-1.2.1; 5.8.3.
Downloads
References
Савина А. К. Ученые степени и звания в зарубежных странах: общее и особенное // Проблемы современного образования. 2015. № 3. С. 10–23. URL: http://www.pmedu.ru/res/2015_3_2.pdf (дата обращения: 31.07.2022).
Bauer M. W. The evolution of public understanding of science – discourse and comparative evidence // Science, Technology and Society. 2009. Vol. 14 (2). Pp. 221–240.
Bodmer W. Public Understanding of Science: The BA, the Royal Society and COPUS // Notes and Records: The Royal Society journal of the history of science. 2010. Vol. 64. Pp. S151–S161. DOI: 10.1098/rsnr.2010.0035.
Bubela T., Nisbet M., Borchelt R. et al. Science communication reconsidered // Nature Biotechnology. 2009. Vol. 27. Pp. 514–518. DOI: 10.1038/nbt0609-514.
De Jong S.P.L., Ketting E., van Drooge L. Highly esteemed science: An analysis of attitudes towards and perceived attributes of science in letters to the editor in two Dutch newspapers // Public understanding of science. 2020. Vol. 29 (1). Pp. 37–52. DOI: 10.1177/0963662519878988.
Dijkstra A. M., de Bakker L., van Dam F., Jensen E. A. Setting the scene // Science communication. An introduction. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte Ltd., 2020. Vol. 1. Pp. 1–16. DOI: 10.1142/9789811209888_0001.
Fischhoff B. The sciences of science communication // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2012. Vol. 110. Pp. 14033–14039. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1213273110.
From PUS to PEST // Science. 2002. Vol. 298. № 5591. Pp. 49.
Funtowicz S. O., Ravetz J. R. Science for the post-normal age // Futures. 1993. Vol. 25. № 7. Pp. 739–755.
Gascoigne T., Schiele B. Introduction. A global trend, an emerging field, a multiplicity of understandings: Science communication in 39 countries // Communicating Science: A Global Perspective. Communicating Science. A Global Perspective. Canberra, ACT, Australia: ANU Press, 2020. Pp. 1–14. DOI: 10.22459/CS.2020.
Miller J. D. Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review // Daedalus. 1983. Vol. 112. № 2. Pp. 29–48.
Peters H. P., Dunwoody S., Allgaier J., Lo Y. Y., Brossard D. Public communication of science 2.0: Is the communication of science via the "new media" online a genuine transformation or old wine in new bottles? // EMBO reports. 2014. Vol. 15. Pp. 749–753.
Pitrelli N. The crisis of the "public understanding of science" in Great Britain // Journal of Science Communication. 2003. Vol. 2. № 1. Pp. 1–9.
Riesch H., Potter C. Citizen science as seen by scientists: Methodological, epistemological and ethical dimensions // Public Understanding of Science. 2014. Vol. 23. № 1. Pp. 107–120.
Smallman M., Lock S. J., Miller S. United Kingdom. The developing relationship between science and society // Communicating Science. A Global Perspective. Canberra, ACT, Australia: ANU Press, 2020. Pp. 931–957. DOI: 10.22459/CS.2020.
References
Einsiedel, E. (2018). "Auditorii" i ikh uchastie v nauke i tekhnike [Publics and their participation in science and technology]. Posobie po obshchestvennym svyazyam v nauke i tekhnologiyah [Guide of the public communication of science and technology]. Moscow: Alpina Fiction, 303–336. (in Russ.).
Savina, A. K. (2015). Uchenye stepeni i zvaniya v zarubezhnyh stranah: obshchee i osobennoe [Academic degrees and titles in foreign countries: general and specific]. Problemy sovremennogo obrazovaniya, 3, 10–23, available at: http://www.pmedu.ru/res/2015_3_2.pdf (accessed 31.07.2022). (in Russ.).
Bauer, M. W. (2009). The evolution of public understanding of science – discourse and comparative evidence. Science, Technology and Society, 14 (2), 221–240.
Bodmer, W. (2010). Public Understanding of Science: The BA, the Royal Society and COPUS. Notes and Records: The Royal Society journal of the history of science, 64, S151–S161. DOI: 10.1098/rsnr.2010.0035.
Bubela, T., Nisbet, M., Borchelt, R. et al. (2009). Science communication reconsidered. Nature Biotechnology, 27, 514–518. DOI: 10.1038/nbt0609-514.
De Jong S.P.L., Ketting E., van Drooge L. (2020). Highly esteemed science: An analysis of attitudes towards and perceived attributes of science in letters to the editor in two Dutch newspapers. Public understanding of science, 29 (1), 37–52. DOI: 10.1177/0963662519878988.
Dijkstra, A. M., de Bakker, L., van Dam, F. & Jensen, E. A. (2020). Setting the scene. Science communication. An introduction. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte Ltd., 2020, 1, 1–16. DOI: 10.1142/9789811209888_0001
Fischhoff, B. (2013). The sciences of science communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 14033–14039. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1213273110
From PUS to PEST (2002). Science, 298 (5591), pp. 49.
Funtowicz, S. O., Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for the post-normal age. Futures, 25 (7), 739–755.
Gascoigne, T., Schiele, B. (2020). Introduction. A global trend, an emerging field, a multiplicity of understandings: Science communication in 39 countries. Communicating Science: A Global Perspective. Canberra, ACT, Australia: ANU Press, 2020, 1–14. DOI: 10.22459/CS.2020.
Miller, J. D. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus, 112 (2), 29–48.
Peters, H. P., Dunwoody, S., Allgaier, J., Lo, Y. Y. & Brossard, D. (2014). Public communication of science 2.0: Is the communication of science via the "new media" online a genuine transformation or old wine in new bottles? EMBO reports, 15, 749–753.
Pitrelli, N. (2003). The crisis of the "public understanding of science" in Great Britain. Journal of Science Communication, 2 (1), 1–9.
Riesch, H., Potter, C., (2014). Citizen science as seen by scientists: Methodological, epistemological and ethical dimensions. Public Understanding of Science, 23 (1), 107–120.
Smallman, M., Lock S. J. & Miller S. (2020). United Kingdom. The developing relationship between science and society. Communicating Science. A Global Perspective. Canberra, ACT, Australia: ANU Press, 931–957. DOI: 10.22459/CS.2020.
Keywords
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Most read articles by the same author(s)
- Зоя Владимировна Вахрамеева, Audiovisual components in russian libraries’ Local literary resources , Znak: problemnoe pole mediaobrazovanija: No 3 (45) (2022): Znak: problemnoe pole mediaobrazovanija
