Pub Date : 2017-02-01DOI: 10.1177/0270467617740496
W. Gonzalez-Espada, Rosina Pérez Aguirre, M. Sarasola
The purpose of this descriptive and exploratory study was to measure the perceptions regarding a variety of science, technology, and society (STS) topics among a sample of Uruguay underclassmen college students. These perceptions were compared with the viewpoints of a group of professional scientists. It was found that, for some STS topics, such as the role of humans in global climate change, the perceptions of Uruguay underclassmen and scientists were statistically identical. For topics, such as the problem of human overpopulation, both groups find themselves on the same side of the issue but with a statistically significant gap between them. Uruguay underclassmen and professional scientists have opposite views on STS topics such as the use of animals for scientific research. A sizable proportion of Uruguay underclassmen were not familiar with several STS topics, such as the scientific work of the International Space Station. Implications for formal and informal STEM education efforts are discussed.
{"title":"Perceptions of STS Topics Among Uruguayan College Students: Implications for Secondary School Curricular Reform","authors":"W. Gonzalez-Espada, Rosina Pérez Aguirre, M. Sarasola","doi":"10.1177/0270467617740496","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617740496","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this descriptive and exploratory study was to measure the perceptions regarding a variety of science, technology, and society (STS) topics among a sample of Uruguay underclassmen college students. These perceptions were compared with the viewpoints of a group of professional scientists. It was found that, for some STS topics, such as the role of humans in global climate change, the perceptions of Uruguay underclassmen and scientists were statistically identical. For topics, such as the problem of human overpopulation, both groups find themselves on the same side of the issue but with a statistically significant gap between them. Uruguay underclassmen and professional scientists have opposite views on STS topics such as the use of animals for scientific research. A sizable proportion of Uruguay underclassmen were not familiar with several STS topics, such as the scientific work of the International Space Station. Implications for formal and informal STEM education efforts are discussed.","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"37 1","pages":"15 - 22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467617740496","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44698612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-02-01DOI: 10.1177/0270467617738696
Aviram Sharma
Drinking water quality has drawn enormous attention from scientific communities, the industrial sector, and the common public in several countries during the last couple of decades. The scholarship in science and technology studies somehow overlooked this crucial domain. This article attempts to contribute to this gray area by exploring how drinking water quality is understood in Indian water policies, laws, and courtrooms. The article argues that water policies and laws in India were significantly shaped by international treaties and global environmental stewardship. In the courtrooms, the Indian judiciary employed minimum science-based evidence in decision making in the context of drinking water–related cases; rather they used a rights-based approach and minimally engaged with the issue of drinking water quality/standards. Whatever little science used as valid science by the judges in the decision making was entirely expert-based. The reliance of the judges on the scientific expertise of the experts representing regulatory organizations and public institutions was another unique characteristic of the relationship between science and law in India.
{"title":"Drinking Water Quality in Indian Water Policies, Laws, and Courtrooms: Understanding the Intersections of Science and Law in Developing Countries","authors":"Aviram Sharma","doi":"10.1177/0270467617738696","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617738696","url":null,"abstract":"Drinking water quality has drawn enormous attention from scientific communities, the industrial sector, and the common public in several countries during the last couple of decades. The scholarship in science and technology studies somehow overlooked this crucial domain. This article attempts to contribute to this gray area by exploring how drinking water quality is understood in Indian water policies, laws, and courtrooms. The article argues that water policies and laws in India were significantly shaped by international treaties and global environmental stewardship. In the courtrooms, the Indian judiciary employed minimum science-based evidence in decision making in the context of drinking water–related cases; rather they used a rights-based approach and minimally engaged with the issue of drinking water quality/standards. Whatever little science used as valid science by the judges in the decision making was entirely expert-based. The reliance of the judges on the scientific expertise of the experts representing regulatory organizations and public institutions was another unique characteristic of the relationship between science and law in India.","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"37 1","pages":"45 - 56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467617738696","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41762475","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-02-01DOI: 10.1177/0270467617740495
Helge I. Strømsø, Ivar Bråten
Socioscientific issues receive considerable public attention and there are concerns that people in general are not able or willing to deal with information at odds with what they believe to be true. In this study, we focused on students’ beliefs about two controversial issues: whether consumption of the artificial sweetener aspartame and use of cell phones, respectively, represent any serious health risks. Our aim was to investigate whether students’ trust in the information was related to prior beliefs, the nature of the message, and students’ critical reading strategies. Results showed interactions between prior beliefs about the issues and text condition (risk vs. no risk) on trust in conclusions that indicated a confirmation bias assumption. Additionally, students trusted conclusions ascertaining that there were risks more than conclusions ascertaining that there were no risks. Finally, students’ self-reported use of critical reading strategies implied less trust in both types of conclusions.
{"title":"Students’ Trust in Research-Based Results About Potential Health Risks Presented in Popular Media","authors":"Helge I. Strømsø, Ivar Bråten","doi":"10.1177/0270467617740495","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617740495","url":null,"abstract":"Socioscientific issues receive considerable public attention and there are concerns that people in general are not able or willing to deal with information at odds with what they believe to be true. In this study, we focused on students’ beliefs about two controversial issues: whether consumption of the artificial sweetener aspartame and use of cell phones, respectively, represent any serious health risks. Our aim was to investigate whether students’ trust in the information was related to prior beliefs, the nature of the message, and students’ critical reading strategies. Results showed interactions between prior beliefs about the issues and text condition (risk vs. no risk) on trust in conclusions that indicated a confirmation bias assumption. Additionally, students trusted conclusions ascertaining that there were risks more than conclusions ascertaining that there were no risks. Finally, students’ self-reported use of critical reading strategies implied less trust in both types of conclusions.","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"37 1","pages":"14 - 3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467617740495","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42954564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-12-01DOI: 10.1177/0270467617714944
Jenny L. Davis, J. Chouinard
As a concept, affordance is integral to scholarly analysis across multiple fields—including media studies, science and technology studies, communication studies, ecological psychology, and design studies among others. Critics, however, rightly point to the following shortcomings: definitional confusion, a false binary in which artifacts either afford or do not, and failure to account for diverse subject-artifact relations. Addressing these critiques, this article demarcates the mechanisms of affordance—as artifacts request, demand, allow, encourage, discourage, and refuse—which take shape through interrelated conditions: perception, dexterity, and cultural and institutional legitimacy. Together, the mechanisms and conditions constitute a dynamic and structurally situated model that addresses how artifacts afford, for whom and under what circumstances.
{"title":"Theorizing Affordances: From Request to Refuse","authors":"Jenny L. Davis, J. Chouinard","doi":"10.1177/0270467617714944","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617714944","url":null,"abstract":"As a concept, affordance is integral to scholarly analysis across multiple fields—including media studies, science and technology studies, communication studies, ecological psychology, and design studies among others. Critics, however, rightly point to the following shortcomings: definitional confusion, a false binary in which artifacts either afford or do not, and failure to account for diverse subject-artifact relations. Addressing these critiques, this article demarcates the mechanisms of affordance—as artifacts request, demand, allow, encourage, discourage, and refuse—which take shape through interrelated conditions: perception, dexterity, and cultural and institutional legitimacy. Together, the mechanisms and conditions constitute a dynamic and structurally situated model that addresses how artifacts afford, for whom and under what circumstances.","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"241 - 248"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467617714944","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65144293","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-12-01DOI: 10.1177/0270467617710852
Katherine P. Dabney, Devasmita Chakraverty, Amy C. Hutton, Katy A. Warner, Robert H. Tai
Existing research has examined if undergraduate factors influence chemistry and physics, or physical science, doctoral degree entry and whether variables during PhD programs associate with graduation. Yet research on the transition from bachelor’s degree to doctoral degree entry (i.e., PhD entry in less than 6 months, attainment of a master’s degree prior to doctoral degree entry, or working in a science-related job for more than a year prior to doctoral degree entry) on PhD degree graduation remains scarce. Our study examines the transition from bachelor’s to doctoral degrees to see if experiences therein associate with female PhD graduation, after doctoral degree enrollment. Our logistic regression analysis, of female chemistry and physics doctorates (n = 867), indicated that attainment of a master’s degree did not change the likelihood of graduation, when compared to direct entry into physical science doctoral programs. Meanwhile working in a science-related job for a year or more is associated with a significantly lower likelihood of physical science doctoral graduation when compared to women who entered directly into PhD programs or received a master’s degree prior to enrollment.
{"title":"The Bachelor’s to PhD Transition: Factors Influencing PhD Completion Among Women in Chemistry and Physics","authors":"Katherine P. Dabney, Devasmita Chakraverty, Amy C. Hutton, Katy A. Warner, Robert H. Tai","doi":"10.1177/0270467617710852","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617710852","url":null,"abstract":"Existing research has examined if undergraduate factors influence chemistry and physics, or physical science, doctoral degree entry and whether variables during PhD programs associate with graduation. Yet research on the transition from bachelor’s degree to doctoral degree entry (i.e., PhD entry in less than 6 months, attainment of a master’s degree prior to doctoral degree entry, or working in a science-related job for more than a year prior to doctoral degree entry) on PhD degree graduation remains scarce. Our study examines the transition from bachelor’s to doctoral degrees to see if experiences therein associate with female PhD graduation, after doctoral degree enrollment. Our logistic regression analysis, of female chemistry and physics doctorates (n = 867), indicated that attainment of a master’s degree did not change the likelihood of graduation, when compared to direct entry into physical science doctoral programs. Meanwhile working in a science-related job for a year or more is associated with a significantly lower likelihood of physical science doctoral graduation when compared to women who entered directly into PhD programs or received a master’s degree prior to enrollment.","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"203 - 210"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467617710852","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65144280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-12-01DOI: 10.1177/0270467617719820
Thomas A. Hemphill
Despite their growing usage in commercial and industrial applications, nanomaterials have yet to be been thoroughly researched as to their potential health, safety, and environmental risk to human life after incorporation into new product improvement, development, design, and manufacturing processes. Identifying the appropriate governance framework for effective risk assessment analysis of toxicological risk to human beings—specifically manufacturing employees and consumers—and other living organisms, resulting from the development and application of these nanotechnology-based products, has yet to be scientifically determined. With major regulatory gaps in the public regulation framework at national and international levels of governance, a proposed private governance framework is needed to assist the existing public regulatory framework with the proliferation of products and manufacturing processes utilizing nanomaterials. There are three distinct (yet complimentary) approaches available to develop a private governance framework to complement existing national public regulatory frameworks: responsible innovation, risk management, and voluntary guidelines/industry standards. The case for supporting a hybrid governance framework, combining public and private governance mechanisms, for nanotechnology is reflective of the current public policy environment that has emerged to best address health, safety, and environmental risk assessment issues concerning nanotechnology and nanomaterials.
{"title":"Regulating Nanomaterials: A Case for Hybrid Governance","authors":"Thomas A. Hemphill","doi":"10.1177/0270467617719820","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617719820","url":null,"abstract":"Despite their growing usage in commercial and industrial applications, nanomaterials have yet to be been thoroughly researched as to their potential health, safety, and environmental risk to human life after incorporation into new product improvement, development, design, and manufacturing processes. Identifying the appropriate governance framework for effective risk assessment analysis of toxicological risk to human beings—specifically manufacturing employees and consumers—and other living organisms, resulting from the development and application of these nanotechnology-based products, has yet to be scientifically determined. With major regulatory gaps in the public regulation framework at national and international levels of governance, a proposed private governance framework is needed to assist the existing public regulatory framework with the proliferation of products and manufacturing processes utilizing nanomaterials. There are three distinct (yet complimentary) approaches available to develop a private governance framework to complement existing national public regulatory frameworks: responsible innovation, risk management, and voluntary guidelines/industry standards. The case for supporting a hybrid governance framework, combining public and private governance mechanisms, for nanotechnology is reflective of the current public policy environment that has emerged to best address health, safety, and environmental risk assessment issues concerning nanotechnology and nanomaterials.","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"219 - 228"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467617719820","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65144334","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-12-01DOI: 10.1177/0270467617726221
C. Sellitto, S. Bingley, Stephen Burgess
Few studies have been conducted into the use of mobile technologies at community-based organizations. Community sport organizations (CSOs) typically operate within a defined geographic area and rely on the primary support of volunteers. Based on the characteristics of mobile-based information services, this article proposes a model that provides a guide for CSOs to classify mobile applications through four mobile utility factors and three innovation adoption determinants (cost, skill requirements, and compatibility). The model is supported visually by the use of Microsoft Excel generated “radar graphs” to illustrate desired practical and actual performance. The contribution of the theoretical model is one of providing a vehicle for evaluating mobile technology applications by CSOs to identify the potential effectiveness of mobile devices, particularly in a preadoption scenario.
{"title":"A Model for Evaluating Mobile Device Adoption in Community Sports Organizations","authors":"C. Sellitto, S. Bingley, Stephen Burgess","doi":"10.1177/0270467617726221","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617726221","url":null,"abstract":"Few studies have been conducted into the use of mobile technologies at community-based organizations. Community sport organizations (CSOs) typically operate within a defined geographic area and rely on the primary support of volunteers. Based on the characteristics of mobile-based information services, this article proposes a model that provides a guide for CSOs to classify mobile applications through four mobile utility factors and three innovation adoption determinants (cost, skill requirements, and compatibility). The model is supported visually by the use of Microsoft Excel generated “radar graphs” to illustrate desired practical and actual performance. The contribution of the theoretical model is one of providing a vehicle for evaluating mobile technology applications by CSOs to identify the potential effectiveness of mobile devices, particularly in a preadoption scenario.","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"211 - 218"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467617726221","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65144353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-10-01DOI: 10.1177/0270467617690058
Kristine Ask
This article investigates the use and effect of optimizing strategies in the online game World of Warcraft. Specifically, it looks at the phenomenon known as “theorycrafting,” wherein expert players reverse engineer the game and use its underlying algorithms to calculate maximized play strategies. Play from a theorycrafting perspective is about the correct input and output of numbers, challenging the narrative of play as something free and frivolous. Seeking to understand how play and knowledge relate to each other, the article discusses how theorycrafting’s seemingly abstract, objective, and neutral information about the game is also embedded with values, ideas, and norms. Based on a 1-year ethnographic study, the article uses Jasanoff’s idiom of coproduction to discuss how abstract calculations are rendered meaningful and valuable by players, and the consequences of this in stabilizing particular ways of playing World of Warcraft.
{"title":"The Value of Calculations: The Coproduction of Theorycraft and Player Practices","authors":"Kristine Ask","doi":"10.1177/0270467617690058","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617690058","url":null,"abstract":"This article investigates the use and effect of optimizing strategies in the online game World of Warcraft. Specifically, it looks at the phenomenon known as “theorycrafting,” wherein expert players reverse engineer the game and use its underlying algorithms to calculate maximized play strategies. Play from a theorycrafting perspective is about the correct input and output of numbers, challenging the narrative of play as something free and frivolous. Seeking to understand how play and knowledge relate to each other, the article discusses how theorycrafting’s seemingly abstract, objective, and neutral information about the game is also embedded with values, ideas, and norms. Based on a 1-year ethnographic study, the article uses Jasanoff’s idiom of coproduction to discuss how abstract calculations are rendered meaningful and valuable by players, and the consequences of this in stabilizing particular ways of playing World of Warcraft.","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"190 - 200"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467617690058","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65144175","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-10-01DOI: 10.1177/0270467617690057
H. Riesch, C. Potter, Linda Davies
The “Open Air Laboratories” (OPAL) is a large, England-wide environmental public engagement (PE) project based on the “citizen science” model. It is designed to involve people of all backgrounds and abilities in the production of environmental science and in the process to educate and raise awareness and enthusiasm about nature and its importance. This article draws on a series of interviews with scientists and science communicators involved in the project to explore their motivations and aims for the project and what they see as the goals of public engagement generally. We find a varied and nuanced array of motivations and aims that interviewees cite for taking part in the project, pointing toward a reevaluation of traditional ways of understanding the value of public engagement, policy relevance, and dialogue within public engagement. Especially relevant in relation to thinking about the policy relevance of PE is our conclusion that there are many different ways of thinking about the value of PE, characterized in this article as “the neglected middle.”
{"title":"What Is Public Engagement, and What Is It for? A Study of Scientists’ and Science Communicators’ Views","authors":"H. Riesch, C. Potter, Linda Davies","doi":"10.1177/0270467617690057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617690057","url":null,"abstract":"The “Open Air Laboratories” (OPAL) is a large, England-wide environmental public engagement (PE) project based on the “citizen science” model. It is designed to involve people of all backgrounds and abilities in the production of environmental science and in the process to educate and raise awareness and enthusiasm about nature and its importance. This article draws on a series of interviews with scientists and science communicators involved in the project to explore their motivations and aims for the project and what they see as the goals of public engagement generally. We find a varied and nuanced array of motivations and aims that interviewees cite for taking part in the project, pointing toward a reevaluation of traditional ways of understanding the value of public engagement, policy relevance, and dialogue within public engagement. Especially relevant in relation to thinking about the policy relevance of PE is our conclusion that there are many different ways of thinking about the value of PE, characterized in this article as “the neglected middle.”","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"9 1","pages":"179 - 189"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467617690057","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65144123","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-10-01DOI: 10.1177/0270467617702781
A. Skuce, J. Cook, M. Richardson, Bärbel Winkler, K. Rice, S. Green, P. Jacobs, D. Nuccitelli
Cook et al. reported a 97% scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), based on a study of 11,944 abstracts in peer-reviewed science journals. Powell claims that the Cook et al. methodology was flawed and that the true consensus is virtually unanimous at 99.99%. Powell’s method underestimates the level of disagreement because it relies on finding explicit rejection statements as well as the assumption that abstracts without a stated position endorse the consensus. Cook et al.’s survey of the papers’ authors revealed that papers may express disagreement with AGW despite the absence of a rejection statement in the abstract. Surveys reveal a large gap between the public perception of the degree of scientific consensus on AGW and reality. We argue that it is the size of this gap, rather than the small difference between 97% and 99.99%, that matters in communicating the true state of scientific opinion to the public.
{"title":"Does It Matter if the Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming Is 97% or 99.99%?","authors":"A. Skuce, J. Cook, M. Richardson, Bärbel Winkler, K. Rice, S. Green, P. Jacobs, D. Nuccitelli","doi":"10.1177/0270467617702781","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617702781","url":null,"abstract":"Cook et al. reported a 97% scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), based on a study of 11,944 abstracts in peer-reviewed science journals. Powell claims that the Cook et al. methodology was flawed and that the true consensus is virtually unanimous at 99.99%. Powell’s method underestimates the level of disagreement because it relies on finding explicit rejection statements as well as the assumption that abstracts without a stated position endorse the consensus. Cook et al.’s survey of the papers’ authors revealed that papers may express disagreement with AGW despite the absence of a rejection statement in the abstract. Surveys reveal a large gap between the public perception of the degree of scientific consensus on AGW and reality. We argue that it is the size of this gap, rather than the small difference between 97% and 99.99%, that matters in communicating the true state of scientific opinion to the public.","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"150 - 156"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467617702781","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65144215","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：