Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (4):553-557 (2000)
|Abstract||The public communication of science and technology has become increasingly important over the last several decades. However, understanding the audience that receives this information remains the weak link in the science communication process. This essay provides a brief review of some of the issues involved, discusses results from an audience-based study, and suggests some strategies that both scientists and journalists can use to modify media coverage in ways that can help audiences better understand major public issues that involve science and technology.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Marko Ahteensuu (2012). Assumptions of the Deficit Model Type of Thinking: Ignorance, Attitudes, and Science Communication in the Debate on Genetic Engineering in Agriculture. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (3):295-313.
Sybil Francis (1999). Developing a Federal Policy on Research Misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):261-272.
Friedrich Christoph Doerge & Mark Siebel (2008). Gricean Communication and Transmission of Thoughts. Erkenntnis 69 (1):55 - 67.
James O. Young (2010). Art and the Educated Audience. Journal of Aesthetic Education 44 (3):29-42.
Maja Horst (2011). Taking Our Own Medicine: On an Experiment in Science Communication. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):801-815.
Paul Faulkner (2007). On Telling and Trusting. Mind 116 (464):875-902.
Hugh M. Culbertson (1989). Should Journalists Follow or Lead Their Audiences?: A Study of Student Beliefs. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 4 (2):193 – 213.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads3 ( #213,351 of 722,871 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,917 of 722,871 )
How can I increase my downloads?