The Public Communication of Science, 4-vol. set: 1st Edition (Hardback) book cover

The Public Communication of Science, 4-vol. set

1st Edition

Edited by Massimiano Bucchi, Brian Trench

Routledge

1,508 pages | 75 B/W Illus.

Purchasing Options:$ = USD
Hardback: 9780415718042
pub: 2015-12-17
SAVE ~$309.00
$1,545.00
$1,236.00
x

FREE Standard Shipping!

Description

This is a new title from Routledge’s Critical Concepts in Sociology series. Compiled by the editorial team behind the acclaimed International Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology (Routledge, 2008), this four-volume ‘mini library’ provides an easy-to-use, one-stop collection of the best foundational and cutting-edge scholarship from the fast-growing—and increasingly important—scholarly domain that is the public communication of science.

As well as bringing together the major works that have shaped this field of research, the collection will be welcomed as the first mapping of an area that to date has rather lacked an authoritative interdisciplinary synthesis. The collection assembles contributions from a variety of subjects (including media and journalism studies, sociology, and the history of science), and it contrasts the perspectives of different geographical and cultural contexts. Together with the editors’ introductions, the gathered materials allow users to make sense of the wide range of approaches, theories, and concepts that have informed the public communication of science.

Table of Contents

Volume I: Theories and Models

1. Ludwik Fleck, Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact (Chicago University Press, 1970), pp. 98–125.

2. C. P. Snow, ‘The Rede Lecture 1959: Part 1, The Two Cultures’, The Two Cultures (Cambridge University Press, 1959), pp. 1–21.

3. Robert K. Merton, ‘The Matthew Effect in Science’, Science, 1968, 159, 3810, 56–63.

4. Leon Trachtman, ‘The Public Understanding of Science Effort: A Critique’, Science Technology and Human Values, 1981, 6, 36, 10–15.

5. Thomas F. Gieryn, ‘Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists’, American Sociological Review, 1983, 48, 781–95.

6. Michel Cloitre and Terry Shinn, ‘Expository Practice: Social, Cognitive and Epistemological Linkages’, in T. Shinn and R. Whitley (eds.), Expository Science: Forms and Functions of Popularisation. Sociology of the Sciences, IX (D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1985), pp. 31–60.

7. Bruno Latour, ‘Literature’, Science in Action: Following Scientists and Engineers Through Society (Harvard University Press, 1987), pp. 21–44.

8. Christopher Dornan, ‘Some Problems in Conceptualising the Issue of "Science and the Media"’, Critical Studies in Media Communication, 1990, 7, 1, 48–71.

9. Leah A. Lievrouw, ‘Communication and the Social Representation of Scientific Knowledge’, Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 1990, 7, 1, 1–10.

10. Stephen Hilgartner, ‘The Dominant View of Popularization: Conceptual Problems, Political Uses’, Social Studies of Science, 1990, 20, 3, 519–39.

11. Brian Wynne, ‘Knowledges in Context’, Science, Technology and Human Values, 1991, 16, 1, 111–21.

12. Mike Michael, ‘Lay Discourses of Science: Science-in-General, Science-in-Particular, and Self’, Science, Technology and Human Values, 1992, 17, 3, 313–33.

13. Jean-Marc Lévy-Leblond, ‘About Misunderstandings about Misunderstandings’, Public Understanding of Science, 1992, 1, 1, 17–21.

14. Baudouin Jurdant, ‘Popularization of Science as the Autobiography of Science’, Public Understanding of Science, 1993, 2, 4, 365–73.

15. Massimiano Bucchi, ‘When Scientists Turn to the Public’, Public Understanding of Science, 1996, 5, 4, 375–94.

16. Peter Weingart, ‘Science and the Media’, Research Policy, 1998, 27, 8, 869–79.

17. Steven Miller, ‘Public Understanding of Science at the Crossroads’, Public Understanding of Science, 2001, 10, 1, 115–20.

18. Massimiano Bucchi, ‘Can Genetics help us Rethink Communication? Public Communication of Science as a "Double Helix"’, New Genetics and Society, 2004, 23, 3 269–83.

19. Maja Horst, ‘In Search of Dialogue: Staging Science Communication in Consensus Conferences, in D. Cheng, M. Claessens, N. R. J. Gascoigne, J. Metcalfe, B. Schiele, and S. Shi (eds.), Communicating Science in Social Contexts: New Models, New Practices (Springer, 2008), pp. 259–74.

20. Brian Trench, ‘Towards an Analytical Framework of Science Communication Models’, in D. Cheng, M. Claessens, N. R. J. Gascoigne, J. Metcalfe, B. Schiele, and S. Shi (eds.), Communicating Science in Social Contexts: New Models, New Practices (Springer, 2008), pp. 119–38.

21. Peter Weingart, ‘The Lure of the Mass Media and its Repercussions on Science’, in P. Weingart, M. Franzen, and S. Rödder (eds), The Sciences’ Media Connection – Public Communication and its Repercussions: Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, 28 (Springer, 2012), pp. 17–32.

22. Alan Irwin, ‘Risk, Science and Public Communication: Third-order Thinking about Scientific Culture’, in M. Bucchi and B. Trench (eds.), Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology, revised edn. (Routledge, 2014), pp. 160–72.

Volume II: Processes and Strategies

23. J. B. S. Haldane, ‘How to Write a Popular Scientific Article’, in K. Dronamraju (ed.), What I Require From Life: Writings on Science and Life from J. B. S. Haldane [1941] (Oxford University Press, 2009), pp. 154–60.

24. Peter Medawar, ‘Is the Scientific Paper a Fraud?’, in P. Medawar, The Threat and the Glory: Reflections on Science and Scientists (Oxford University Press, 1963), pp. 228–33.

25. Rae Goodell, ‘What’s a Nice Scientist Doing in a Place Like the Press?’, The Visible Scientists (Little, Brown, 1977), pp. 120–41.

26. Royal Society, The Public Understanding of Science, Sections 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 (The Royal Society, 1985), pp. 9–16, 21–8.

27. Rae Goodell, ‘How to Kill a Controversy: The Case of Recombinant DNA’, in S. Friedman, S. Dunwoody, and C. L. Rogers (eds.), Scientists and Journalists: Reporting Science as News (The Free Press, 1986), pp. 170–81.

28. Susan L. Star and James R. Griesemer, ‘Institutional Ecology, "Translations" and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology 1907–39’, Social Studies of Science, 1989, 19, 387–419.

29. David M. Phillips, E. J. Kanter, B. Bednarczyk, and P. L. Tastad, ‘Importance of the Lay Press in the Transmission of Medical Knowledge to the Scientific Community’, New England Journal of Medicine, 1991, 325, 16, 1180–3.

30. Anders Hansen, ‘Journalistic Practices and Science Reporting in the British Press’, Public Understanding of Science, 1992, 3, 2, 111–34.

31. Bruce V. Lewenstein, ‘From Fax to Facts: Communication in the Cold Fusion Saga’, Social Studies of Science, 1995, 25, 3, 403–36.

32. Jean-Marc Lévy-Leblond, ‘The Case for Science Criticism’, La Pierre de Touche: La Science a l’épreuve (Editions Gallimard, 1996), pp. 149–64 (a new translation by David Denby).

33. Hans Peter Peters, ‘The Interaction of Journalists and Scientific Experts: Co-operation and Conflict between Two Professional Cultures’, Media Culture and Society, 1995, 17, 1, 31–48.

34. Carl Sagan, ‘No Such Thing as a Dumb Question’, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark (Headline, 1996), pp. 300–17.

35. Tom Wilkie, ‘Sources in Science: Who Can We Trust?’, Lancet, 1996, 347, 1308–11.

36. Tim Radford, ‘Science for People Who Don’t Want to Know About Science’, Accountability in Research, 1997, 5, 39–43.

37. Jane Gregory and Steven Miller, ‘ABC of Risk: Apples, Beef, and Comets’, Science in Public: Communication, Culture and Credibility (Plenum Press, 1998), pp. 166–95.

38. Sharon Dunwoody, ‘Scientists, Journalists and the Meaning of Uncertainty’, in S. M. Friedman, S. Dunwoody, and C. L. Rogers (eds.), Communicating Uncertainty: Media Coverage of New and Controversial Science (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1999), pp. 59–79.

39. Stephen Jay Gould, ‘Preface’, The Lying Stones of Marrakech: Penultimate Reflections in Natural History (Jonathan Cape 2000), pp. 1-3.

40. Alan Irwin, ‘Constructing the Scientific Citizen: Science and Democracy in the Biosciences’, Public Understanding of Science, 2001, 10, 1, 1–18.

41. Susanna Hornig Priest, ‘Re-inventing milk’, A Grain of Truth: The Media, the Public, and Biotechnology (Rowman and Littlefield, 2001), pp. 17–34.

42. Vincent Kiernan, ‘Diffusion of News about Research’, Science Communication, 2003, 25, 1, 3–13.

43. Hans Peter Peters, Dominique Broassard, Suzanne de Cheveigné, Sharon Dunwoody, Monika Kallfass, Steve Miller, and Shoji Tsuchida. ‘Science-Media Interface: It’s Time to Reconsider’, Science Communication, 2008, 30, 2, 266-276.

44. Stuart Allan, ‘Making Science Newsworthy: Exploring the Conventions of Science Journalism’, in R. Holliman, E. Whitelegg, E. Scanlon, S. Smidt, and J. Thomas (eds.), Investigating Science Communication in the Information Age: Implications for Public Engagement and Popular Media (Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 149–65.

45. Brian Trench, ‘Science Reporting in the Electronic Embrace of the Internet’, in R. Holliman, E. Whitelegg, E. Scanlon, S. Smidt, and J. Thomas (eds.), Investigating Science Communication in the Information Age: Implications for Public Engagement and Popular Media (Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 166–79.

46. Declan Fahy and Matthew Nisbet, ‘The Science Journalist Online: Shifting Roles and Emerging Practices’, Journalism, 2011, 12, 7, 778–93.

47. Bernard Schiele, ‘Science Museums and Centres: Evolution and Contemporary Trends’, in M. Bucchi and B. Trench (eds.), Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology, revised edition (Routledge, 2014), pp. 40–57.

Volume III: Publics for Science

48. Helga Nowotny, ‘Experts and their Expertise: On the Changing Relationship between Experts and their Public’, Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 1981, 1, 2, 235-241.

49. Jon D. Miller, ‘Scientific Literacy: A Conceptual and Empirical Review’, Daedalus, 1983, 112, 2, 29–48.

50. Maurice Goldsmith, ‘The Proper Public for Science’, The Science Critic: A Critical Analysis of the Popular Presentation of Science (Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986), pp. 1–16.

51. Steven Shapin, ‘Science and the Public’, in R. C. Olby et al. (eds.), Companion to the History of Modern Science, pp. 990–1007.

52. Brian Wynne, ‘Misunderstood Misunderstanding: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science', Public Understanding of Science, 1992, 1, 281–304.

53. John Durant, ‘What is Scientific Literacy?’, European Review, 1994, 2, 1, 83–9.

54. Geoffrey A. Evans and John R. Durant, ‘The Relationship Between Knowledge and Attitudes in the Public Understanding of Science in Britain’, Public Understanding of Science, 1995, 4, 1, 57–74.

55. Steven Epstein, ‘The Construction of Lay Expertise: AIDS, Activism and the Forging of Credibility in the Reform of Clinical Trials’, Science, Technology and Human Values, 1995, 20, 4, 408–37.

56. Michel Callon, ‘The Role of Lay People in the Production and Dissemination of Scientific Knowledge’, Science, Technology and Society, 1999, 4, 1, 81–94.

57. Benoit Godin and Yves Gingras, ‘What is Scientific and Technological Culture and How is it Measured? A Multidimensional Model’, Public Understanding of Science, 2000, 9, 1, 43.

58. Bernadette Bensaudé-Vincent, ‘A Genealogy of the Increasing Gap Between Science and the Public’, Public Understanding of Science, 2001, 10, 99-113.

59. Sheila Jasanoff, ‘Technologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science’, Minerva, 2003, 41, 223–44.

60. Dietram A. Scheufele and Bruce V. Lewenstein, ‘The Public and Nanotechnology: How Citizens Make Sense of Emerging Technologies’, Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 2005, 7, 659–67.

61. Martin Bauer Nick Allum and Steven Miller, ‘What Can We Learn from 25 Years of PUS Research? Liberating and Expanding the Agenda’, Public Understanding of Science, 2007, 16, 79–95.

62. Ulrike Felt and Maximilian Fochler, ‘The Bottom-up Meanings of the Concept of Public Participation in Science and Technology’, Science and Public Policy, 2008, 35, 7, 489–99.

63. Susanna Hornig Priest, ‘Reinterpreting the Audiences of Media Messages about Science’, in R. Holliman, E. Whitelegg, E. Scanlon, S. Smidt, and J. Thomas (eds.), Investigating Science Communication in the Information Age: Implications for Public Engagement and Popular Media (Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 223–36.

64. Edna F. Einsiedel, ‘Publics and their Participation in Science and Technology: Changing Roles, Blurring Boundaries’, in M. Bucchi and B. Trench (eds), Routledge Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology (Routledge, 2014), pp. 125–39.

Volume IV: Media Representations of Science

65. Allan Mazur, ‘Media Coverage and Public Opinion on Scientific Controversies’, Journal of Communication, 1981, 31, 2, 106–15.

66. Marcel C. LaFollette, ‘Science on Television: Influences and Strategies’, Daedalus, 1982, 111, 4, 183–97.

67. Roger Silverstone, ‘Narrative Strategies in Television Science: A Case Study’, Media, Culture & Society, 1984, 6, 4, 377–410.

68. Harry Collins, ‘Certainty and the Public Understanding of Science: Science on Television’, Social Studies of Science, 1987, 17, 689–713.

69. Daniel Jacobi and Bernard Schiele, ‘Scientific Imagery and Popularized Imagery’, Social Studies of Sciences, 1989, 19, 731–53.

70. Ulrike Felt, ‘Fabricating Scientific Success Stories’, Public Understanding of Science, 1993, 2, 375–90.

71. Dorothy Nelkin, ‘Promotional Metaphors and their Popular Appeal’, Public Understanding of Science, 1994, 3, 25–31.

72. Dorothy Nelkin, ‘The Scientific Mystique’, Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology, 2nd edn. (W. H. Freeman, 1995), pp. 14–30.

73. Suzanne De Cheveigné and Eliseo Veron, ‘Science on TV: Forms and Receptions of Science Programmes on French Television’, Public Understanding of Science, 1996, 5, 231–53.

74. Matthew C. Nisbet and Bruce V. Lewenstein, ‘Biotechnology and the American Media: The Policy Process and the Elite Press, 1970 to 1999’, Science Communication, 2002, 23, 4, 359–91.

75. Brigitte Nerlich, Robert Dingwall, and David D. Clarke, ‘The Book of Life: How the Completion of the Human Genome Project was Revealed to the Public’, Health: An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine, 2002, 6, 4, 445–69.

76. Esa Valiverronen, ‘Expert, Healer, Reassurer, Hero and Prophet: Framing Genetics and Medical Scientists in Television News’, New Genetics and Society, 2006, 25, 3, 233–48.

77. Martin W. Bauer, Kristina Petkova, Pepka Boyadjieva, and Galin Gornev, ‘Long-Term Trends in the Public Representation of Science across the "Iron Curtain": 1946–1995’, Social Studies of Science, 2006, 36, 1, 99–131.

78. Anabela Carvalho, ‘Ideological Cultures and Media Discourses on Scientific Knowledge: Re-reading News on Climate Change’, Public Understanding of Science, 2007, 16, 223–43.

79. M. Schäfer, ‘From Public Understanding to Public Engagement: An Empirical Assessment of Changes in Science Coverage’, Science Communication, 2009, 30, 4, 475–505.

About the Series

Critical Concepts in Sociology

The Routledge Critical Concepts in Sociology series provides concise, authoritative reprints of key articles in sociology, collecting the essential secondary literature on key subjects. Edited by acknowledged leaders in the field, each set puts the development of fundamental concepts into their historical context, and provides students and researchers with a clear snapshot of current thinking. Collections span a multitude of subject areas, including religion, multiculturalism and celebrity.

Learn more…

Subject Categories

BISAC Subject Codes/Headings:
SOC026000
SOCIAL SCIENCE / Sociology / General