Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Public Understanding of Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Locke, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The use of scientific discourse by creation scientists: some preliminary findings

Simon Locke

School of Social Science, Kingston University, Penrhyn Road, Kingston Upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2ST, UK

A central issue to emerge from recent research into the public understanding of science concerns the methods of study adopted. A distinction is made here between the public understanding of science (meaning knowledge of scientific orthodoxy), and the public understanding of science (meaning what people take `science' to mean). This is used to consider the case of creation science, which is analysed using the method of discourse analysis developed initially by Gilbert and Mulkay. It is shown that creationists appear to employ similar discursive techniques and resources—supplemented by their alternative beliefs—to those used by orthodox scientists. Whilst acknowledging limitations of the creationist case, it is argued that it is sufficient to show the value of methods of study that are sensitive to possible contextual variations in the public understanding of science. It is suggested that more research of this nature is needed to determine the extent to which science is used as a resource of accounting, both alone and in conjunction with alternative discursive resources.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 3, No. 4, 403-424 (1994)
DOI: 10.1088/0963-6625/3/4/004
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
R. Dingwall and M. Aldridge
Television wildlife programming as a source of popular scientific information: a case study of evolution
Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2006; 15(2): 131 - 152.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
G. Edmond and D. Mercer
Creating (public) science in the Noah's Ark case
Public Understanding of Science, October 1, 1999; 8(4): 317 - 343.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
S. Locke
Golem science and the public understanding of science: from deficit to dilemma
Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 1999; 8(2): 75 - 92.
[Abstract] [PDF]