Public Engagement as a Means of Restoring Public Trust in Science – Hitting the Notes, but Missing the Music?

By Brian Wynne. Public Health Genomics, 2006

949 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6f5d9f5217dc5cfdd8e3a38a2fca0ba6490a7341

How researchers see this paper

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

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Taking roles in interdisciplinary collaborations (2015, neutral): “A sig n i f ica nt add it iona l factor in the institutional support for the incorporation of social science research and public engagement initiatives into novel technological programmes is the commonplace assumption that the visceral public controversies that surrounded the development of genetica”
Perspectives on Innovation Processes (2013, background): “For instance, customers in certain parts of the world view genetically modified foods with suspicion despite confronting food shortages (Wynne, 2006).”
Towards an Analytical Framework of Science Communication Models (2008, background): “As indicated in the discussion of dialogue approaches to public relations, as also claimed by Wynne (2006) in relation to PCST dialogue and engagement initiatives in Britain, and as evidenced in the insistence of many in this field on ‘real dialogue’ and ‘public engagement’, the dialogue banner ma”
Toward inclusive tech policy design: a method for underrepresented voices to strengthen tech policy documents (2019, background): “Historically, tech policy development has relied strongly on technical and policy expert-led approaches (Sturgis and Allum 2004; Wynne 2006; Frewer et al.”
The relationship between trust in AI and trustworthy machine learning technologies (2019, background): “Rather, in many cases the public adopts an ambivalent form of trust – described by Wynne [93, 91, 92] as an: as if trust.”
Developing a framework for responsible innovation* (2013, background): “In addition, a growing body of critique has eveloped, drawing attention to, among other things: framing ffects within dialogue processes which can reinforce existing elations of professional power and deficit understandings of he public (Wynne, 2006; Kerr et al., 2007), thus constituting, at imes, a”
Risk perception, trust and public engagement in nuclear decision-making in Hong Kong (2014, background): “…a mechanism for enhancing trust Public engagement has been increasingly recognised as one of the important mechanisms for enhancing trust (Bellaby, 2007; Bloomfield et al., 2001; Bradbury et al., 1999; Brunk, 2006; Denhardt, 2002; Petts, 2008; Stebbing, 2009; Wang and van Wart, 2007; Wynne, 2006).”
The effect of perceived and assessed knowledge of climate change on public policy concerns: An empirical comparison (2014, background): “4 Wynne (1996, 2006), in particular, has been critical of KDM, and places a good deal of the blame on the inability of the scientific community and political institutions to frame their information in a way that allows the public to not react negatively (see also Wesselink et al., 2013).”