More Like this

1. Five thoughts about improving science communication as an organizational activity

   https://doi.org/10.1108/jcom-03-2020-0022  

   Besley, John C. (May 2020, Journal of Communication Management)

   null (Ed.)

   Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe five key lessons learned from a decade of studying how scientists and science communicators think about communication strategy. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on the experience of the researcher and the underlying literatures on strategic communication and science communication. Findings The key argument is that the scientific community needs to put more priority into enabling organizations to plan and implement strategic communication efforts on behalf of science. At present, there is too much reliance on individual communicators. Originality/value The value of this paper is in the degree to which it argues for a more strategic, organization-focused approach to science communication that emphasizes the setting of clear behavioral goals, followed by discussion about what communication objectives might help achieve those goals and the communication tactics needed to achieve the prioritized objectives. 

   more » « less
2. How Do Scientists Perceive the Relationship Between Ethics and Science? A Pilot Study of Scientists’ Appeals to Values

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-023-00429-1  

   Linville, Caleb L.; Cairns, Aidan C.; Garcia, Tyler; Bridges, Bill; Herington, Jonathan; Laverty, James T.; Tanona, Scott (June 2023, Science and Engineering Ethics)

   Abstract Efforts to promote responsible conduct of research (RCR) should take into consideration how scientists already conceptualize the relationship between ethics and science. In this study, we investigated how scientists relate ethics and science by analyzing the values expressed in interviews with fifteen science faculty members at a large midwestern university. We identified the values the scientists appealed to when discussing research ethics, how explicitly they related their values to ethics, and the relationships between the values they appealed to. We found that the scientists in our study appealed to epistemic and ethical values with about the same frequency, and much more often than any other type of value. We also found that they explicitly associated epistemic values with ethical values. Participants were more likely to describe epistemic and ethical values as supporting each other, rather than trading off with each other. This suggests that many scientists already have a sophisticated understanding of the relationship between ethics and science, which may be an important resource for RCR training interventions. 

   more » « less
3. “I wanted to break the pencil”: The Teacher’s Role in Reframing Moments of Epistemic Vexation

   Hagan, C.; Morandi, S.L.; Kásper, V.; Southerland, S.A. (January 2022, National Association of Research in Science Teaching)

   Science Education has transitioned to science proficiency-- students are to gain the ability to engage in sense making about the natural world (National Research Council [NRC, 2012])--learning to “figure things out” (Passmore, 2014). One emerging area of focus is the emotional work students participate in during science sense making. There is growing recognition that these emotions are not just unnecessary by-products of scientific work, but rather they are part-and-parcel of doing science, as these emotions are part of what “instigates and stabilizes disciplinary engagement” in scientific pursuits (Jaber & Hammer, 2016b, p. 189). The research question that guided this study is: What is the teacher's role in reframing moments of epistemic vexation, so students experience productive meta-affect in the science classroom? After reviewing video footage and student and teacher interviews, three themes emerged: (1) Without reframing from the teacher during moments of epistemic vexation, students disengage from sense-making, (2) Productive meta-affect is more likely to occur when students understand why the teacher allows for failure to connect ideas or understand scientific concepts, and (3) When the teacher does not reframe moments of epistemic vexation, students build solidarity and reach out to each other for emotional support in developing productive meta-affect. 

   more » « less
4. Effects of long-term ecological research and cognitive biases on the evaluation of scientific information by public land managers in Oregon and Washington, USA

   https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15744-300101  

   Rapp, Claire; Nelson, Michael; Bruskotter, Jeremy (January 2025, Ecology and Society)

   Natural resource managers (managers) value and use scientific information to inform their decision-making process in a variety of ways. The scientific information managers use depends on a variety of factors, including the source of the information and ease of access. Barriers, such as paywalls, insufficient capacity, and information overload play an important role in determining what scientific information managers have access and attend to. Additionally, characteristics of managers themselves also influence what scientific information they prioritize and implement. Specific factors likely play an important role in how managers evaluate the utility and strength of scientific information. We examine two potential factors, (1) the number of years of the study as an indicator of research quality, and (2) the cognitive bias to prefer confirming information. We surveyed public land managers in Oregon and Washington, USA and used a 2x2 experimental design to evaluate how time frame and agreement with prior beliefs influences the perceived usefulness of scientific information and the soundness of management prescriptions for three management issues: post-fire salvage logging, variable density thinning of mature growth stands, and translocation of native species as a climate adaptation behavior. We find in general respondents equally value the results of long-term and short-term studies but prefer information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs over information that challenges them. In open-ended responses about the soundness of action prescriptions, we found across all conditions respondents were resistant to adopting a management action because of the results of the example studies. Although previous research has examined the barriers and facilitators to getting managers access to scientific information, our study highlights the ways the mere provisioning of information does not guarantee its use, as managers evaluate information in light of their pre-existing values and beliefs. Scientists, science communicators, and boundary spanners should consider what characteristics managers use to evaluate the usefulness and applicability of information when designing studies and framing and communicating results. 

   more » « less
5. Who’s Afraid of the Base-Rate Fallacy?

   https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2024.39  

   Dethier, Corey (May 2025, Philosophy of Science)

   Abstract This paper evaluates the back-and-forth between Mayo, Howson, and Achinstein over whether classical statistics commits the base-rate fallacy. I show that Mayo is correct to claim that Howson’s arguments rely on a misunderstanding of classical theory. I then argue that Achinstein’s refined version of the argument turns on largely undefended epistemic assumptions about “what we care about” when evaluating hypotheses. I end by suggesting that Mayo’s positive arguments are no more decisive than her opponents’: even if correct, they are unlikely to compel anyone not already sympathetic to the classical picture. 

   more » « less