The Science of
Science Communication II
Summary of a Colloquium
Held on September 23-25, 2013,
at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C.
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
The Science of Science Communication II Summary of a Colloquium Held on September 23-25, 2013, at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C.
OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 This volume is based on the Arthur M. Sackler Colloquium of the National Acad- emy of Sciences, “The Science of Science Communication II,” held September 23-25, 2013, at the National Academy of Sciences building on Constitution Avenue in Washington, DC. NOTICE: Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this volume are those of the colloquium presenters and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences. International Standard Book Number -13: 978-0-309-29200-9 International Standard Book Number -10: 0-309-29200-X Additional copies of this book are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth St., NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334- 3313; http://www.nap.edu. Cover art: In this 2013 commissioned work by Heather Larkin, the landscape of sci- ence communication appears as a patchwork of regions—or conceptual contexts— each characterized by unique features, dimensions, and hues. Communication bridges the regions in complex combinations of messages between individuals, groups, and institutions. Copyright 2014 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the cademy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal govern- A ment on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its mem- bers, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advis- ing the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Insti- tute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in pro- viding services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org
OCR for page R1
OCR for page R1
Contents 1 THE SCIENCES OF COMMUNICATION 1 Lay Narratives and Epistemologies, 2 Motivated Audiences: Belief and Attitude Formation About Science Topics, 7 Communicating Uncertainty, 14 Social Networks, 20 Science Communication as Political Communication, 26 Lessons Learned, 33 2 SCIENCE IN A TIME OF CONTROVERSY 35 Responding to the Attack on the Best Available Evidence, 36 Public Attitudes, Stakeholder Perspectives, and the Challenge of “Upstream” Engagement, 40 The Benefits of Extreme Simplicity in Communicating Nutrition Science, 43 Enhanced Active Choice: A New Method to Change Behavior, 46 Lessons for Science Communication from Business, 49 Influences of Social Media, 51 Charting Science Chatter Through Social Media, 54 What Predicts Which Scientific Findings Are Widely Shared?, 56 Science Narratives: Mass Media and Ethical Considerations, 60 How Scientists Talk to One Another About Their Science— and What the Public Hears, 63 v
OCR for page R1
vi / Contents Tales Teens Tell: Interactive Media Communications Can Improve Adolescent Health, 65 Surging Seas: A Collaboration in Five Acts, 68 Final Comments, 74 3 CREATING COLLABORATIONS FOR COMMUNICATION 75 WORKING GROUP ON CLIMATE CHANGE, 76 Report of the Breakout Group on Climate Change, 76 Discussion During the Breakout Group, 77 WORKING GROUP ON EVOLUTION, 83 Report of the Breakout Group on Evolution, 83 Discussion During the Breakout Group, 84 WORKING GROUP ON OBESITY AND NUTRITION, 90 Report of the Breakout Group on Nutrition, 90 Discussion During the Breakout Group, 91 WORKING GROUP ON NANOTECHNOLOGY, 95 Report of the Breakout Group on Nanotechnology, 95 Discussion During the Breakout Group, 96 Closing Remarks, 100 REFERENCES 103 APPENDIXES A Agenda 105 B Speakers 111
OCR for page R1
Preface S uccessful scientists must be effective communicators within their professions. Without those skills, they could not write papers and funding proposals, give talks and field questions, or teach classes and mentor students. However, communicating with audiences outside their profession—people who may not share scientists’ interests, technical background, cultural assumptions, and modes of expression— resents p different challenges and requires additional skills. Communication about science in political or social settings differs from discourse within a sci- entific discipline. Not only are scientists just one of many stakeholders vying for access to the public agenda, but the political debates surround- ing science and its applications may sometimes confront scientists with unfamiliar and uncomfortable discussions involving religious values, par- tisan interests, and even the trustworthiness of science. In response to these problems, the National Academy of Sciences has hosted two Sackler colloquia on The Science of Science Communication. These events brought together leading social, behavioral, and decision scientists to familiarize one another, other scientists, and communication practitioners with current research that can improve the communication of science to lay audiences. In the Sackler colloquia tradition, the meetings also allowed social and natural scientists to identify new opportunities for collaboration and advancing their own research, while improving public engagement with science. The first colloquium, and accompanying special issue of the Pro- ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,1 included research in science 1 See http://www.pnas.org/content/110/Supplement_3. vii
OCR for page R1
viii / PREFACE education, communication, medicine, and decision science. The second colloquium, reported here, incorporated social and cognitive psychology, political science, mass communication, cultural anthropology, business, and social network analysis. It, too, will be captured in a special issue of PNAS, with articles summarizing relevant research areas in those sciences and applying them to domains as diverse as climate change, nanotechnol- ogy, and medicine. Following 2 days of talks and panels, the second colloquium hosted day-long work sessions, bringing together subject-matter experts, r esearchers in the sciences of communication, and communication profes- sionals. Together they developed communication strategies for four topics: climate change, nanotechnology, obesity and nutrition, and evolution. More than 500 people attended the colloquium, while over 10,000 joined concurrent webcasts or visited the archived recordings.2 As reported here, speakers encouraged scientists to approach com- munication in new ways and to create the infrastructure needed to link scientists, communication professionals, and their audiences. Speakers provided evidence-based guidance on how to listen to others so as to identify their information needs, ways of thinking about the world, and the cultural stereotypes regarding scientists. They delved deeply into the incentive systems that shape what scientists study and how they report their work, the subtle changes in “framing” that can influence how mes- sages are interpreted, the complex channels that determine how messages flow, and the potential politicization of scientific evidence. Speakers were also challenged to go beyond their disciplinary pur- suits in order to understand the problems that face those scientists who attempt to communicate their work and collaborate with scientists from other disciplines. In the spirit of the Sackler colloquia, those collabora- tions can lead to research that would not have occurred without working together in a common cause. As a result, the enterprise can be as beneficial for the sciences of communication as for the communication of science. Finally, the colloquium organizers would like to thank the National Science Foundation, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Science, and COMPASS for their valuable financial support of the colloquium summarized in these pages. Ralph J. Cicerone Baruch Fischhoff Alan I. Leshner Barbara A. Schaal Dietram A. Scheufele Co-organizers 2 See http://bit.ly/sackler.