Framing Science: A New Paradigm in Public Engagement

By Matthew C. Nisbet. 2009

218 citations recorded by the source corpus.

(2008). As the news conference participants described, the report had been carefully designed to provide an authoritative account of evolutionary science, communicated in a manner that would be more accessible to an audience of school board members, journalists, teachers, activist parents, and clergy. ﬁWhere evolution debates occur in the country, scientists and others call us for help and the major tool we provide is this bookletﬂ said committee member Bruce Alberts, editor of

Subfields: History and Philosophy of Science, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/26cae61b5c20618c678f948de13d01dcb9ae54a9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In History and Philosophy of Science

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Seepage: Climate change denial and its effect on the scientific community (2015, background): “…is warming and (b) most of that warming has been due to human greenhouse gas emissions (Anderegg et al., 2010; Doran and Zimmerman, 2009; Oreskes, 2004)—have often emphasized scientific uncertainty in order to forestall mitigative action (e.g., Kim, 2011; Freudenburg et al., 2008; Nisbet, 2009).”
Boomerang Effects in Science Communication (2012, background): “…that has emerged in the last decade, we argue that opinions about climate change and climate mitigation, much like the issue of abortion, has become a fundamental identity marker for how Republicans and Democrats politically define themselves and others (Dunlap & McCright, 2008; Nisbet, 2009a).”
One or Many? The Influence of Episodic and Thematic Climate Change Frames on Policy Preferences and Individual Behavior Change (2011, background): “…in the literature on whether or not scientists should be public advocates on the issue of climate change (Fischhoff, 2007; Maibach & Priest, 2009; Nisbet, 2009b), there is broad agreement that public advocacy will likely play a critical role in encouraging societal changes that reduce carbon…”
Qualitative Interviews With Science Communication Trainers About Communication Objectives and Goals (2016, background): “…which the training they provide focused on building knowledge; fostering excitement (e.g., National Research Council, 2009); building trust by showing caring, listening, and/or competence (e.g., Fiske & Dupree, 2014); and framing messages so that they resonate with audiences (e.g., Nisbet, 2010).”
What's next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions. (2009, background): “…can be used ethically by prioritizing dialogue and bottom-up citizen expression, by avoiding false spin or hype and remaining true to what is conventionally known about a scientifi c topic, and by avoiding the denigration of social groups and the advancement of partisan causes ( Nisbet, 2009c ).”