Science Communication

This article offers an alternative to the dominant approach for analyzing public perceptions of science. The authors seek first to clarify to what extent the public at large holds defined attitudes toward science, proposing an “index of cognitive and evaluative distance.” They then present a map of perceptions of science in end-of-century Europe based on correspondence analysis, which displays some of the most salient elements of how science was appropriated in the culture of the time. The map shows that shared social and cognitive characteristics across nations act as unifying forces in public perceptions of science, while the nation variable conserves important singularities. Knowledge of science plays a very significant role in accounting for differences in value judgments about science. “Reservations,” not “promise” items, divide the perceptions of different social groups, suggesting that more weight should be given to the former in future studies.

The authors tested a novel approach to the conceptualization and measurement of a dimension of scientific literacy, the understanding of scientific and technical terms. Through an analysis of the media’s use of scientific and technical terms randomly selected from a scientific dictionary, the authors identified the thirty-one terms most often used in the media. The authors argue that these terms represent what an individual is expected to know within the bounds of normal civic discourse. The measure that was developed therefore represents a conceptualization of a “civically literate” scientific vocabulary that avoids the possible biases that could be associated with a selection of terms based solely on experts’ views. Scientific literacy results obtained through the use of the instrument at the pilot-test level are discussed and contrasted with those obtained when using the National Science Foundation’s scale, which is the most widely cited public scientific literacy measurement instrument based on a more conventional approach to scientific literacy.

Indicators of trends in environmental conditions have been touted as ways to inform the public and provide a “report card” on environmental agency performance, but no quantitative analysis of such claims has been done. A small study of New Jersey residents’ reactions to indicators as presented by the state environmental agency found that these indicators were deemed understandable, credible, and useful. However, actual comprehension was not related to perceived understanding, and many in this well-educated sample exhibited the ecological fallacy of inferring local environmental conditions or priority-setting uses that these indicators could not possibly provide. Prior beliefs about statewide trends in environmental quality, accuracy in extracting information from the indicator presentations, and demographic variables had varying but significant effects on reactions to and interpretations of the indicators. These findings have implications for preparation and evaluation of institutional communications about science in general.

Does a national norm exist for environment reporters, or do they differ by region? This study used a census approach to examine environmental journalists in four regions of the United States. Across all four regions, these reporters spent much of their time covering nonenvironment stories. They relied more often on local and state sources than on national sources and used a variety of story frames and angles to construct their reporting. In discussing barriers to reporting, they were more likely to cite such issues as time constraints or the size of the news hole rather than interference by editors or advertisers. Most felt the need to remain objective, rejecting calls for advocacy or a civic-journalism approach. The study found more similarities across the regions than differences, suggesting that there is a national norm for covering the environment.

Advances in neuroscience are increasingly intersecting with issues of ethical, legal, and social interest. This study is an analysis of press coverage of an advanced technology for brain imaging, functional magnetic resonance imaging, that has gained significant public visibility over the past ten years. Discussion of issues of scientific validity and interpretation dominated over ethical content in both the popular and specialized press. Coverage of research on higher order cognitive phenomena specifically attributed broad personal and societal meaning to neuroimages. The authors conclude that neuroscience provides an ideal model for exploring science communication and ethics in a multicultural context.