This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Bauer, M. W. Articles by Miller, S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

What can we learn from 25 years of PUS survey research? Liberating and expanding the agenda

Social Psychology and Research Methodology, London School of Economics, Science Museum London, M.Bauer{at}lse.ac.uk

Nick Allum

Department of Sociology, University of Surrey

Steve Miller

University College London

This paper reviews key issues of public understanding of science (PUS) research over the last quarter of a century. We show how the discussion has moved in relation to large-scale surveys of public perceptions by tracing developments through three paradigms: science literacy, public understanding of science and science and society. Naming matters here like elsewhere as a marker of "tribal identity." Each paradigm frames the problem differently, poses characteristic questions, offers preferred solutions, and displays a rhetoric of "progress" over the previous one. We argue that the polemic over the "deficit concept" voiced a valid critique of a common sense concept among experts, but confused the issue with methodological protocol. PUS research has been hampered by this "essentialist" association between the survey research protocol and the public deficit model. We argue that this fallacious link should be severed to liberate and to expand the research agenda in four directions: contextualizing survey research, searching for cultural indicators, integrating datasets and doing longitudinal analysis, and including other data streams. Under different presumptions, assumed and granted, we anticipate a fertile period for survey research on public understanding of science.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 16, No. 1, 79-95 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0963662506071287


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. C. Nisbet and D. A. Scheufele What's next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions Am. J. Botany, October 1, 2009; 96(10): 1767 - 1778. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Miller, D. Fahy, and The ESConet Team Can Science Communication Workshops Train Scientists for Reflexive Public Engagement?: The ESConet Experience Science Communication, September 1, 2009; 31(1): 116 - 126. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Stares Using Latent Class Models to Explore Cross-national Typologies of Public Engagement with Science and Technology in Europe Science Technology and Society, July 1, 2009; 14(2): 289 - 329. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. R. Davies Constructing Communication: Talking to Scientists About Talking to the Public Science Communication, June 1, 2008; 29(4): 413 - 434. [Abstract] [PDF]