Abstract
What is the significance of communication in science? Though the question has been addressed by researchers in a number of fields, most have tended to see communication as an intermediary step on the way to some other phenomenon of interest, aprocess that is only interesting insofar as it produces some other structural or functionalproduct, e.g., documents, organizations, or social groups. From a communication research perspective, however, the communication processes themselves are the object of study. The diversity and flexibility of scientists’ communication behavior, and the complexity of their communication channels, styles, messages and networks, have not been assessed as a set of related phenomena. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to draw together several analytical concepts regarding scientific communication processes that have been proposed by the author elsewhere, including the issue of social representations (Lievrouw, 1990), the scientific communication cycle (Lievrouw and Carley, 1991), and the scholarly research narrative (Lievrouw, 1989, and Mokros and Lievrouw, 1991). The concepts are combined here into one conceptual framework and applied to the case of a single biomedical specialty, lipid metabolism research, which has developed from an esoteric biochemical subfield to a large and well-funded specializaiton with a great deal of influence on American culture’s preoccupation with heart disease.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brown, M.S., & Goldstein, J.L. (1978). General scheme for regulation of cholesterol metabolism in mammalian cells. In J.M. Dietschy, A.M. Gotto, Jr., & J.A. Ontko (Eds.),Disturbances in lipid and lipoprotein metabolism. Bethesda, MD: American Physiological Society.
Brown, M.S., & Goldstein, J.L. (1984). How LDL receptors influence cholesterol and atherosclerosis.Scientific American, 251(5), 58–66.
Brown, M.S., & Goldstein, J.L. (1986). A receptor-mediated pathway for cholesterol homeostasis,Science, 232, 34–47.
Castelli, W.P. (1989). Foreword. InThe hypercholesterolemia handbook. West Point, PA: Merck Sharp & Dohme.
Compton, B. (1973). Scientific communication. In I. Pool, W. Schramm, N. Maccoby, & E.B. Parker (Eds.),Handbook of communication. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Crawford, S. (1971). Informal communication among scientists in sleep research.Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 22, 301–310.
Cruickshank, A.M. (1986). Gordon research conferences.Science, 231, 1163–1199.
Edge, D.O. (1979). Quantitative measures of communication in science: A critical review.History of Science, 17, 102–134.
Fielding, C.J., & Fielding, P. (1985). The metabolism of cholesterol and lipoproteins. In D.E. Vance & J.E. Vance (Eds.),The biochemistry of lipids and membranes. New York: Benjamin/Cummings.
Fleck, L. (1979).The genesis and development of a scientific fact (Trenn, T.J., and Merton, R.K., Eds.; and Bradley, F. and Trenn, T.J., Trans.) Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Frederickson, D.S., Lees, R.S., & Levy, R.I. (1967). Fat transport in lipoproteins: An integrated approach to mechanisms and disorders.New England Journal of Medicine, 276, 148–156, 215–226.
Garvey, W.D. (1979).Communication: The essence of science. Facilitating information exchange among librarians, scientists, engineers, and students. New York: Pergamon Press.
Grundy, S.M. (1990). Cholesterol and coronary heart disease: Future directions.Journal of the American Medical Association, 264(23), 3053–3059.
The hypercholesterolemia handbook. (1989). West Point, PA: Merck Sharp & Dohme.
Kolata, G. (1990, January 2). To make the big time of science, better take your show on the road.New York Times.
Kuhn, T.S. (1970).The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (1987).Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
L’Enfant, C. (1986). A new challenge for America: The National Cholesterol Education Program.Circulation, 73, 855–856.
Lievrouw, L.A., & Carley, K. (1990). Changing patterns of communication among scientists in an era of “telescience”.Technology in Society, 12, 457–477.
Lievrouw, L.A. (1990). Communication and the social representation of scientific knowledge.Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 7(1), 1–10.
Lievrouw, L.A. (1989).The construction of the research narrative as a communication strategy in scholarship. Paper presented at the seventh annual Conference on Culture and Communication, Temple University, October, Philadelphia, PA; and at the annual meeting of the Society for Social Studies of Science, November, Irvine, CA.
Lievrouw, L.A. (1988). Four programs of research in scientific communication.Knowledge in Society, 1(2), Summer, 6–22.
Lievrouw, L.A. Rogers, E.M., Lowe, C.U., & Nadel, E. (1987). Triangulation as a research strategy for identifying invisible colleges among biomedical scientists.Social Networks, 9, 217–248.
Lievrouw, L.A. (1986).The communication network as interpretive environment: “Sense-making” among biomedical research scientists. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Annenberg School of Communications, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Maccoby, N., & Solomon, D.S. (1981) Heart disease prevention: Community studies. In R.E. Rice & W.J. Paisley (Eds.),Public communication campaigns (pp. 105–125). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Menzel, H. (1968). Informal communication in science: Its advantages and its formal analogues. In E.B. Montgomery (Ed.),The foundations of access to knowledge: A symposium. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University.
Merton, R. (1973).The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Mokros, H.B., & Lievrouw, L.A. (1991). Communication-information relationship in self-representation: Suicide notes and academic research narratives.Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 12(4), June, 389–405.
Moscovici, S. (1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In R. Farr & S. Moscovici (Eds.),Social representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Motulsky, A.G. (1986). The 1985 Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine.Science, 231, 126–129.
Nelkin, D. (1987).Selling science: How the press covers science and technology. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Paisley, W. (1965).The flow of (behavioral) science information: A review of the research literature. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
Price, D.J.DeS. (1963).Little science, big science. New York: Columbia Unviersity Press.
Roiser, M. (1989). Commonsense, science, and public opinion.Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 17(4), 411–432.
Schulman, K.A., Kinosian, B., Jacobson, T.A., Glick, H., William, M.K., Koffer, H., & Eisenberg, J.M. (1990). Reducing high blood cholesterol level with drugs: Cost-effectiveness of pharmacologic management.Journal of the American Medical Association, 264(23), 3025–3033.
Studer, K.E., & Chubin, D.E. (1980).The cancer mission: Social context of biomedical research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Wells, A. (1987). Social representations and the world of science.Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 17(4) 433–445.
Wysowski, D.K., Kennedy, D.L., & Gross, T.P. (1990). Prescribed use of cholesterol-lowering drugs in the United States, 1978 through 1988.Journal of The American Medical Association, 263(16), 2185–2188.
Ziman, J. (1987).Knowing everything about nothing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Her research interests include the social impacts of new communication technologies, and scholarly and research communication. She received her Ph.D. from the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Southern California and an M.A. in biomedical communications from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lievrouw, L.A. Communication, representation, and scientific knowledge: A conceptual framework and case study. Knowledge and Policy 5, 6–28 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02692789
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02692789