Content uploaded by Harald Hornmoen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Harald Hornmoen on Dec 16, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Questioning researchers' evaluation of communication experiences: A combined interview-and media-based study of communicating socially contestable research
Abstract
This case study examines researchers' experiences with-and several media's practices of-communicating a research project that is scientifically complex, potentially highly impactful and socially contestable: the NTNU Cyborg. The project's researchers study human cells as components connected to a robot interfaced with biological neural networks. Key goals of our study are to understand challenges tied to communicating interdisciplinary research that tends to be regarded as pushing ethical barriers, and to contribute to critical reflection on how communication practices and media coverage may strengthen a dialogue between citizens and research communities on social issues tied to science-in-the-making.
Researchers’ communication activities are influenced by motivations and abilities, but also by specific topics and artefacts of research. This is seldom acknowledged in efforts to embed responsible research and innovation in organizations through mechanisms that promote communication as synergistic activities. Nor is it sufficiently acknowledged in the literature on researchers’ attitudes to communication. To open up a discussion on this issue, we draw on recent literature on affordances to explore how a certain ‘prop’ influences outcomes of research communication in the NTNU Cyborg initiative, which integrates biological neural cultures with electronic circuitry and robotics to build a cybernetic organism. The case illustrates the wide range of affordances – both enabling and constraining features – that a particular object of communication may have in different settings, indicating the need for artefact-specific approaches to researchers’ attitudes to communication and to the institutionalization of RRI.
Organoids are 3D biological structures constructed from stem cells in vitro. They partially mimic the function of real organs. Although the number of articles detailing this technology has increased in recent years, papers debating their ethical issues are few. In addition, many of such articles outline a mere summary of potential ethical concerns associated with organoids, although some have focused on consciousness assessment or organoid use in cystic fibrosis treatment. This article seeks to evaluate the moral status of cerebral organoids and to determine under which conditions their use should be allowed from a bioethical standpoint. We will present an overview of recent steps in developing highly advanced cerebral organoids, followed by an analysis of their ethics based on three factors: human origin, a specific biological threshold (which, once crossed, grants an entity moral status), and the potential to generate human beings. We will also make practical recommendations for researchers working in this biological field.
This chapter discusses journalism as framing from two standpoints: the scholarly perspective, which describes how elements of a real-world process are investigated via conceptual definitions and theory integration, and the professional perspective, which describes how the frame concept is relegated in newsroom discourse to technical aspects of structuring and visualizing stories but nonetheless is utilized by industry observers to critique journalism’s social roles and functions. Based on these discussions, the chapter lays out five ways that journalism practices can inform the academic study of journalism as framing.
Organoids are three-dimensional biological structures grown in vitro from different kinds of stem cells that self-organise mimicking real organs with organ-specific cell types. Recently, researchers have managed to produce human organoids which have structural and functional properties very similar to those of different organs, such as the retina, the intestines, the kidneys, the pancreas, the liver and the inner ear. Organoids are considered a great resource for biomedical research, as they allow for a detailed study of the development and pathologies of human cells; they also make it possible to test new molecules on human tissue. Furthermore, organoids have helped research take a step forward in the field of personalised medicine and transplants. However, some ethical issues have arisen concerning the origin of the cells that are used to produce organoids (ie, human embryos) and their properties. In particular, there are new, relevant and so-far overlooked ethical questions concerning cerebral organoids. Scientists have created so-called mini-brains as developed as a few-months-old fetus, albeit smaller and with many structural and functional differences. However, cerebral organoids exhibit neural connections and electrical activity, raising the question whether they are or (which is more likely) will one day be somewhat sentient. In principle, this can be measured with some techniques that are already available (the Perturbational Complexity Index, a metric that is directly inspired by the main postulate of the Integrated Information Theory of consciousness), which are used for brain-injured non-communicating patients. If brain organoids were to show a glimpse of sensibility, an ethical discussion on their use in clinical research and practice would be necessary.
This article explores science journalism in the context of the media competition for readers' attention. It offers a qualitative stylistic perspective on how popular journalism colonizes science communication. It examines a sample of 400 headlines collected over the period of 15 months from the ranking of five 'most-read' articles on the website of the international magazineNew Scientist Dominant lexical properties of the sample are first identified through frequency and keyness survey and then analysed qualitatively from the perspective of the stylistic projection of newsworthiness. The analysis illustrates various degrees of stylistic 'hybridity' in online popularization of scientific research. Stylistic patterns that celebrate, domesticate or personalize science coverage (characteristic of popular journalism) are intertwined with devices that foreground tentativeness, precision and informativeness (characteristic of science communication). The article reflects on the implications of including various proportions of academic and popular styles in science journalism.
The world around us is continually being shaped by science, and by society's relationship to it. In recent years sociologists have been increasingly preoccupied with the latter, and now in this fascinating book, Massimiano Bucchi provides a brief introduction to this topical issue. Bucchi provides clear and unassuming summaries of all the major theoretical positions within the sociology of science, illustrated with many fascinating examples. Theories covered include Thomas Kuhn's theory of scientific change, the sociology of scientific knowledge, actor-network theory, and the social construction of technology. The second half of the book looks at recent public controversies over the role of science in the modern world including: * the Sokal affair, otherwise known as the science wars * debates over public understanding of science, such as global warming and genetically modified food * the implications of the human genome project. This much needed introduction to a rapidly growing area brings theory alive and will be essential reading for all students of the sociology of science. © 2002 Società editrice il Mulino, Bologna. © 2004 Massimiano Bucchi, and Adrian Belton for the translation. All rights reserved.
Much of the science communication and journalism studies literature continues to reiterate the same critiques about science journalism. This literature accuses science journalists of inaccuracy, sensationalism, oversimplification and failing to engage audiences in meaningful debate about scientific issues. However, research has yet to offer concrete solutions to journalists that connect theory to practice in an effort to counter these criticisms. In this paper, we approach this gap through the development of clearly articulated models of science journalism that are supported by theoretical considerations of the varying purposes of science communication, and then, importantly, tied to practical story development criteria. Four models are presented: science literacy, contextual, lay-expertise and public participation. These models are clear representations of how science journalism can be produced from within different theoretical frameworks and thereby provide a theoretically-informed but practical guide for nuanced evaluations of the quality of science journalism.