透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.238.235.248
  • Journals
  • OpenAccess

科學傳播的範疇:是知識散播還是公民參與?

Science Communication: Knowledge Dissemination or Public Engagement?

Abstracts


本文旨在探討不同的科學傳播模式並主張:關心公眾是否信任科學,以及科學在社會中的角色,雖然重要,然而關心知識創造與供給—科學最核心的功能—仍必須是科學傳播的首要目標。過去二十年傳播典範的移轉導致焦點由知識傳播移轉到改善科學形象。參與典範的民主意圖,在實務運作中常被矮化為創造娛樂經驗,為公眾提供「公眾參與遊樂場」,妨礙民眾實質地參與科學事務。透過科學家與常民的對話,確實可能帶來知識的共同建構,但作者認為知識散播本身仍然是科學傳播的重要目標。為避免缺失模式的陷阱,作者建議,民主社會應採用「非權威式知識傳播」。本文以臺灣、德國、美國的實證數據,從公眾對科學的信任度,以及科學家對公民參與的態度,說明相關的議題。

Parallel abstracts


This essay discusses models of science communication. It concludes that while public trust in science and the relationship between science and society are important, the core function of science is creation and provision of knowledge and hence this should be prioritized in the public communication of science. The turn from "public understanding of science" to "public engagement with science and technology" as an attempt to address the crisis of trust has shifted attention from communication of knowledge towards communication aiming at improving the relation of science and society. In practice, the implementation of the public engagement paradigm often trivialized its original democratic pretensions. Creating enjoyable experiences for members of the public seems to be the primary goal, while the business of science is shielded from substantial public participation and public engagement "playgrounds" are created instead. With respect to communication related to knowledge, I acknowledge the potential of co-construction of knowledge through discourses that include both scientists and non-scientists but still argue that plain dissemination of knowledge remains an important function of science communication. To avoid the pitfalls of the so-called deficit model I propose "non-paternalistic knowledge communication" as a model suited to democratic societies. Empirical data about trust in science and scientists' attitudes towards public participation in Taiwan, the United States and Germany illustrates some of the issues regarding trust and participation.

References


Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for the post-normal age. Futures, 25, 739-755. doi:10.1016/0016-3287(93)90022-L
Gibbons, M. (1999). Science’s new social contract with society. Nature, 402(Suppl.), C81-C84. doi:10.1038/35011576
Irwin, A. (2014). From deficit to democracy (re-visited). Public Understanding of Science, 23, 71-76. doi:10.1177/0963662513510646
Jordan, R., Crall, A., Gray, S., Phillips, T., & Mellor, D. (2015). Citizen science as a distinct field of inquiry. BioScience, 65, 208-211. doi:10.1093/biosci/biu217
Marginson, S. (2011). Higher education in East Asia and Singapore: Rise of the Confucian model. Higher Education, 61, 587-611. doi:10.1007/s10734-010-9384-9

Read-around