Subjects

As new media proliferate and the public's trust and engagement in science are influenced by industry involvement in academic research, an interdisciplinary workshop provides some recommendations to enhance science communication.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    House of Lords. Science and Society (House of Lords, London, 2000). <>.

  2. 2.

    The Royal Society. Factors Affecting Science Communication: A Survey of Scientists and Engineers (The Royal Society, London, 2006). <>.

  3. 3.

    Public Underst. Sci. 17, 309–327 (2008).

  4. 4.

    United Kingdom Research Councils. UK Public Attitudes to Science, 2008: A Survey (RCUK, Swindon, 2008). <>.

  5. 5.

    <>.

  6. 6.

    & Report and Recommendations of the Panel to Assess the NIH Investment in Research on Gene Therapy (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, 1995). <>.

  7. 7.

    Sociol. Health Illn. 21, 579–596 (1999).

  8. 8.

    National Science Foundation. Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding (National Science Board, Arlington, Virginia, USA, 1998).

  9. 9.

    UK Office of Science and Technology Science and the Public. A Review of Science Communication and Attitudes to Science in Britain (Wellcome Trust, London, 2000).

  10. 10.

    & Public Underst. Sci. 13, 55–74 (2004).

  11. 11.

    , , & Human Cloning in the Media: From Science Fiction to Science Practice (Routledge, Abingdon, UK, 2007).

  12. 12.

    & Public Underst. Sci. 16, 421–440 (2007).

  13. 13.

    , & Soc. Res. Online 4 (1999) <>.

  14. 14.

    Public engagement and dialogue: a research review. in Handbook of Public Communication on Science and Technology (eds. Bucchi, M. & Smart, B.) 173–184 (Routledge, London, 2008).

  15. 15.

    & Public Underst. Sci. 17, 329–348 (2008).

  16. 16.

    , , & Sci. Commun. 30, 209–235 (2008).

  17. 17.

    Community Genet. 9, 211–220 (2006).

  18. 18.

    & See-through Science: Why Public Engagement Needs to Move Upstream (Demos, London, 2004).

  19. 19.

    & Public Underst. Sci. 16, 345–364 (2007).

  20. 20.

    & Polit. Behav. 28, 175–192 (2006).

  21. 21.

    An Economic Theory of Democracy (Harper, New York, 1957).

  22. 22.

    The Reasoning Voter (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1991).

  23. 23.

    in Red and Blue Nation, vol. 1 (eds. Nivola, P. & Brady, D.W.) 222–263 (The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, 2006).

  24. 24.

    & Science 316, 56 (2007).

  25. 25.

    & Am. J. Sociol. 95, 1–37 (1989).

  26. 26.

    Communication 49, 103–122 (1999).

  27. 27.

    & Scientist 21, 39–44 (2007).

  28. 28.

    & CBE Life Sci. Educ. 7, 20–24 (2008).

  29. 29.

    & Int. J. Press/Politics 11, 2, 3–40 (2006).

  30. 30.

    , & Genet. Med. 9, 850–855 (2007).

  31. 31.

    & Can. Med. Assoc. J. 170, 1399–1407 (2004).

  32. 32.

    & Sci. Commun. 23, 359–391 (2002).

  33. 33.

    , & Biotechnology in the Public Sphere: A European Sourcebook (Michigan State University Press, Lansing, Michigan, USA, 1998).

  34. 34.

    et al. Community Genet. 8, 133–144 (2005).

  35. 35.

    et al. Sci. Commun. 321, 204–205 (2008).

  36. 36.

    & J. Commun. 54, 55–70 (2004).

  37. 37.

    in Cognitive Foundations of Linguistic Usage Patterns (eds. Schmid, H.J. & Handl, S.) (Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, in the press).

  38. 38.

    & Sociol. Health Illn. 29, 46–65 (2007).

  39. 39.

    Trends Biotechnol. 22, 337–339 (2004).

  40. 40.

    Clin. Genet. 70, 445–450 (2006).

  41. 41.

    , , & Control. Clin. Trials 19, 159–166 (1998).

  42. 42.

    & Health 5, 373–390 (2001).

  43. 43.

    J. Commun. Inq. 23, 163–182 (1999).

  44. 44.

    et al. Sci. Commun. 24, 458–478 (2003).

  45. 45.

    , , & PLoS One 2, e1266 (2007).

  46. 46.

    & Sci. Commun. 24, 395–419 (2003).

  47. 47.

    & Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 19, 24–52 (2007).

  48. 48.

    <

  49. 49.

    Nature 450, 33 (2007).

  50. 50.

    , & Genet. Med. 5, 332–337 (2003).

  51. 51.

    Mayo Clinic Staff. Genetic testing you can order online. Women's Health (Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, 26 March 2008). <>.

  52. 52.

    et al. Cell Stem Cell 3, 591–594 (2008).

  53. 53.

    , & (eds.). A Field Guide for Science Writers. (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2005).

  54. 54.

    et al. PLoS Med. 2, e215 (2005).

  55. 55.

    in Genes and Human Self-Knowledge (eds. Weir, R., Lawrence, S.C. & Fales, E.) 104–121 (University of Iowa Press, Iowa City, Iowa, USA, 1994).

  56. 56.

    & Health Law Rev. 16, 39–47 (2008).

  57. 57.

    U.S. Government Accountability Office. Nutrigenetic Testing: Tests Purchased from Four Web Sites Mislead Consumers (GAO-06-977T, 2006). <>.

  58. 58.

    , , & Acad. Med. (in the press).

  59. 59.

    & Sci. Prog. Spring/Summer: 78–81 (2008).

  60. 60.

    , , & Genet. Med. 7, 198–205 (2005).

  61. 61.

    Nature 458, 274–277 (2008).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The workshop was supported by grants from Genome Canada (grant no. G53400000 to T. Caulfield, E. Einsiedel, P. Phillips and M. Veeman), The Stem Cell Network (to T. Caulfield, E. Einsiedel and B.M. Knoppers) and The Advanced Food and Materials Network (grant no. 18G to T. Caulfield and D. Castle). We thank N. Hawkins at the Health Law Institute (Edmonton, Alberta, Canada) for administrative support.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

    • Tania Bubela
  2. Health Law Institute, Law Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

    • Tania Bubela
    • , Robyn Hyde-Lay
    • , Summer Lane
    • , Ubaka Ogbogu
    •  & Colin Ouellette
  3. School of Communication, American University, Washington, DC, USA.

    • Matthew C Nisbet
  4. Genetics and Public Policy Center, Johns Hopkins University, Washington, DC, USA.

    • Rick Borchelt
  5. Division of Community Health & Humanities, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada.

    • Fern Brunger
  6. Faculty of Life and Social Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia.

    • Cristine Critchley
  7. Faculty of Communication and Culture, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

    • Edna Einsiedel
  8. Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

    • Gail Geller
  9. Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

    • Gail Geller
  10. Department of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

    • Gail Geller
  11. Applied Research and Analysis Directorate, Health Policy Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

    • Anil Gupta
  12. Department for Sociology of Technology and Environment, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.

    • Jürgen Hampel
  13. Genome Alberta, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

    • Robyn Hyde-Lay
    •  & Mike Spear
  14. Science Journalism Research Group, School of Journalism, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

    • Eric W Jandciu
  15. Faculty of Communication and Culture, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

    • S Ashley Jones
  16. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

    • Pam Kolopack
  17. Canadian Science Writers Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

    • Tim Lougheed
  18. Institute for Science and Society, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

    • Brigitte Nerlich
  19. Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

    • Ubaka Ogbogu
  20. Centre for Material Digital Culture, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.

    • Kathleen O'Riordan
  21. ESRC Centre for Economic and Social Aspects of Genomics (Cesagen), Institute for Advanced Studies, County South, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.

    • Kathleen O'Riordan
  22. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

    • Stephen Strauss
  23. Faculty of Communication and Culture, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

    • Thushaanthini Thavaratnam
  24. Stem Cell Network, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

    • Lisa Willemse
  25. Health Law Institute, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

    • Timothy Caulfield
  26. Faculty of Law, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

    • Timothy Caulfield
  27. School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

    • Timothy Caulfield

Authors

  1. Search for Tania Bubela in:

  2. Search for Matthew C Nisbet in:

  3. Search for Rick Borchelt in:

  4. Search for Fern Brunger in:

  5. Search for Cristine Critchley in:

  6. Search for Edna Einsiedel in:

  7. Search for Gail Geller in:

  8. Search for Anil Gupta in:

  9. Search for Jürgen Hampel in:

  10. Search for Robyn Hyde-Lay in:

  11. Search for Eric W Jandciu in:

  12. Search for S Ashley Jones in:

  13. Search for Pam Kolopack in:

  14. Search for Summer Lane in:

  15. Search for Tim Lougheed in:

  16. Search for Brigitte Nerlich in:

  17. Search for Ubaka Ogbogu in:

  18. Search for Kathleen O'Riordan in:

  19. Search for Colin Ouellette in:

  20. Search for Mike Spear in:

  21. Search for Stephen Strauss in:

  22. Search for Thushaanthini Thavaratnam in:

  23. Search for Lisa Willemse in:

  24. Search for Timothy Caulfield in:

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tania Bubela.

About this article

Publication history

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0609-514

Further reading

Newsletter Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing