Abstract
The results and discussions in Chaps. 1, 2, 3 and 4 detailed the public understanding of nanotechnologies, their discussions, and their responses to various speakers in public engagement events. While these are useful and important insights with implications for future public communication, engagement events, and potential regulation of nanotechnologies, these events and the data we gathered from them also offer guidance for science communicators and public engagement practitioners. This chapter provides that practical guidance in a brief, straightforward way, using both details from the 11 public engagement events in this study and previous research on effective science communication and public engagement with science.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Works Cited
Alter, A. (2014). Drunk tank pink: And other unexpected forces that shape how we think, feel, and behave. New York: Penguin Books.
Bitzer, L. F. (1968). The rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1, 1–14.
Brossard, D., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2010). A critical appraisal of models of public understanding of science: Using practice to inform theory. In L. Kahlor & P. A. Stout (Eds.), Communicating science: New agendas in communication (pp. 11–39). New York: Routledge.
Bucchi, M. (2008). Of deficits, deviations and dialogues: Theories of public communication of science. In M. Bucchi & B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and technology (pp. 57–76). New York: Routledge.
Cobb, M. D. (2005). Framing effects on public opinion about nanotechnology. Science Communication, 27(2), 221–239.
Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1984). Audience addressed/audience invoked: The role of audience in composition theory and pedagogy. College Composition and Communication, 35(2), 155–171.
Einsiedel, E. F. (2008). Public participation and dialogue. In M. Bucchi & B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and technology (pp. 173–184). New York: Routledge.
Endres, D. (2010). Expanding notions of scientific argument: A case study of the use of scientific argument by American Indians. In L. Kahlor & P. A. Stout (Eds.), Communicating science: New agendas in communication (pp. 187–208). New York: Routledge.
Foucault, M. (2012). The courage of truth: The government of self and others, II. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gehrke, P. J., & Keith, W. M. (2015). Introduction: A brief history of the National Communication Association. In P. J. Gehrke & W. M. Keith (Eds.), A century of communication studies: The unfinished conversation (pp. 1–25). New York: Routledge.
Gehrke, P. J. (2009). The ethics and politics of speech: Communication and rhetoric in the twentieth century. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Issever, C., & Peach, K. (2010). Presenting science: A practical guide to giving a good talk. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Keranen, L. (2010). Competing characters in science-based controversy: A framework for analysis. In L. Kahlor & P. A. Stout (Eds.), Communicating science: New agendas in communication (pp. 133–160). New York: Routledge.
Lerner, A. S., & Gehrke, P. J. (2018). Organic public engagement: How ecological thinking transforms public engagement with science. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Levitt, S. D., & Dubner, S. J. (2005). Freakonomics: A rogue economist explores the hidden side of everything. New York: Harper Collins.
Nisbett, M. C. (2010). Framing science: A new paradigm in public engagement. In L. Kahlor & P. A. Stout (Eds.), Communicating science: New agendas in communication (pp. 40–67). New York: Routledge.
Peters, H. P. (2008). Scientists as public experts. In M. Bucchi & B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and technology (pp. 131–146). New York: Routledge.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: The Free Press.
Vatz, R. E. (1973). The myth of the rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 6(3), 154–161.
Wynne, B. (2008). Elephants in the rooms where publics encounter “science”?: A response to Darrin Durant, “Accounting for expertise: Wynne and the autonomy of the lay public”. Public Understanding of Science, 17(1), 21–33.
Wynne, B. (1991). Knowledges in context. Science, Technology & Human Values, 16(1), 111–121.
Wynne, B. (1992). Misunderstood misunderstanding: Social identities and public uptake of science. Public Understanding of Science, 1(3), 283–304.
Wynne, B. (2003). Seasick on the third wave? Subverting the hegemony of propositionalism. Social Studies of Science, 33(3), 401–417.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gehrke, P.J. (2018). Lessons for Science Communicators: Assumptions and Assessment. In: Nano-Publics . Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69611-9_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69611-9_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69610-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-69611-9
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)