Additional reading and references


Additional reading

What is science communication?

  • National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/23674.

 

Who communicates science?

  • Corner, A., Shaw, C. and Clarke, J. (2017) Communicating environmental and sustainability science: Challenges, opportunities, and the changing political context. A Knowledge Report for Mistra.

 

When does science communication become advocacy, and does it matter?

  • ‘Does Engagement in Advocacy Hurt the Credibility of Scientists? Results from a Randomized National Survey Experiment. Kotcher, J., Myers, T., Vraga, E., Stenhouse N & Maibach, E (2017), Environmental Communication, 11:3, 415-429, DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2016.1275736
  • ‘Scientific advocacy: A tool for assessing the risks of engagement.’ Schmidt, G and Donner, S (2017). Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2017.1364008
  • The Honest Broker. Pielke, R (Jr). (2007).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. An online summary of Pielke’s typology of scientific roles is avaliable at ‘Five Modes of Scientific Engagement’ http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/five-modes-of-science-engagement.html

 

General Climate Science Communication Resources

References

Besley, J and Dudo A. (2017). ‘Scientists’ Views about Public Engagement and Science Communication in the Context of Climate Change.’ Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.380

 

Brulle, R.J., Carmichael, J. & Jenkins, J.C. (2012). Shifting public opinion on climate change: an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002–2010. Climatic Change, 114 (2), 169-188. doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0403-y

 

Budescu, D.V., Broomell, S., & Por, H. (2009). ‘Improving communication of uncertainty in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.’ Psychological Science 20, 299–308.

 

Capstick, S. and Pidgeon, N.F. (2014). ‘Public perception of cold weather events as evidence for and against climate change.’ Climatic Change, 122, 695-708. . DOI: 10.1007/s10584-013-1003-1.

 

Capstick, S.B., Demski, C.C., Sposato, R.G., Pidgeon, N.F., Spence, A. & Corner, A. (2015). Public perceptions of climate change in Britain following the winter 2013/2014 flooding. Understanding Risk Research Group Working Paper 15-01, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.

 

Corner, A. & van Eck, C. (2014). Science and stories: bringing the IPCC to life. Climate Outreach.

 

Corner, A. & Clarke, J. (2016). Talking climate: From research to practice in public engagement. Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46744-3

 

Corner, A., Lewandowsky, S., Phillips, M. and Roberts, O. (2015) The Uncertainty Handbook. Bristol: University of Bristol.

 

Corner, A., Webster, R. & Teriete, C. (2015). Climate Visuals: Seven principles for visual climate change communication (based on international social research). Oxford: Climate Outreach.

 

Corner, A., Marshall, G. and Clarke, J. (2016). Communicating effectively with the centre-right about household energy-efficiency and renewable energy technologies. Oxford: Climate Outreach.

 

Dahlstrom, M.F. (2014). Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with non-expert audiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 11(4), p. 13614–13620. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1320645111

 

Donner, S. & McDaniels, J. (2013). The influence of national temperature fluctuations on opinions about climate change in the U.S. since 1990. Climatic Change. DOI: 10.1007/s10584-012-0690-3

 

Dunlap, R.E., Marquart-Pyatt, S.T., & McCright, A.M. (2016). Political ideology and views about climate change in the European Union. Environmental Politics, 25, 338–358. doi:10.1080/09644016.2015.1090371

 

Freudenburg, W.R., Gramling, R., and Davidson, D.J. (2008). Scientific Certainty Argumentation Methods (SCAMs): Science and the politics of doubt. Sociological Inquiry, 78(1), 2-38. Retrieved from http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/students/envs_4800/freudenberg_2008. pdf

 

Funtowicz, S.O. & Ravetz, J.R. (1992). Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science. In S. Krimsky and D. Golding (eds.), Social Theories of Risk. Westport, CT: Praeger

 

Harris, A., Corner, A. Xu, J., & Du, X. (2013). Lost in translation? Interpretations of the probability phrases used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in China and the UK. Climatic Change 121 (2), 415-425

 

Howe, P., Markowitz, E., Lee, T.M., Co, C.Y. & Leiserowitz, A.A. (2012). Global perceptions of local temperature change. Nature Climate Change

 

Johnson, B.B. & Slovic, P. (1995). Presenting uncertainty in health risk assessment: Initial studies of its effects on risk perception and trust. Risk Analysis, 15(4), 485-494. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb00341.x

 

Kotcher, J., Myers, T., Vraga, E., Stenhouse N & Maibach, E (2017). ‘Does Engagement in Advocacy Hurt the Credibility of Scientists? Results from a Randomized National Survey Experiment.’ Environmental Communication, 11:3, 415-429, DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2016.1275736

 

Lewandowsky S, Gignac GE, Oberauer K (2015) ‘Correction: The Role of Conspiracist Ideation and Worldviews in Predicting Rejection of Science.’ PLOS ONE 10(8): e0134773. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0134773

 

Marshall, G. (2014). After The Floods: Communicating Climate Change Around Extreme Weather. Climate Outreach Information Network, Oxford.

 

McDonald, R., Chai, H and Newell, B. (2015). ‘Personal experience and the ‘psychological distance’ of climate change: An integrative review.’ Journal of Environmental Psychology. Vol. 44, 109-118

 

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine [NASEM]. (2017). Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23674

 

National Research Council. (2014). Review of EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Process. Committee to Review the IRIS Process, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Division on Earth and Life Studies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

 

National Science Board. (2016). Chapter 7: Science and technology: Public attitudes and understanding. In Science and Engineering Indicators 2016. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

 

Nisbet, M. & Markowitz, E. (2016). Strategic Science Communication on Environmental Issues. Commissioned White Paper in Support of the Alan Leshner Leadership Institute. American Association for the Advancement of Science.

 

Pielke Jr, R. (2007). The Honest Broker: Making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge University Press.

 

Rabinovich, A. & Morton, T. A. (2012). Unquestioned Answers or Unanswered Questions: Beliefs About Science Guide Responses to Uncertainty in Climate Change Risk Communication. Risk Analysis 32, 992–1002.

 

Rosa, E.A., Renn, O. & McCright, A. (2013). The Risk Society Revisited. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

 

Sarewitz, D. (2011). Science Advocacy is an Institutional Issue, Not an Individual One. Conference presentation at Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes, Arizona State University

 

Schwartz, S.H. (1992). Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries. United Kingdom: Academic Press, Inc.

 

Schwartz, Shalom, Cieciuch, Jan., Vecchione, Michael et al. 2012. ‘Refining the Theory of Basic Individual Values.’Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 103, 663–688

 

Smith, J., Tyszczuk, R., and Butler, R. eds. (2014). Culture and Climate Change: Narratives. Culture and Climate Change, 2. Cambridge, UK: Shed.

 

Spence, A., Poortinga, W and Pidgeon, N. (2012). ‘The psychological distance of climate change.’ Risk Analysis, 32(6):957-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01695.x

 

Sturgis, P. & Allum, N. (2004). Science in society: Re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understanding of Science, 13, 55–74. doi:10.1177/0963662504042690

 

van der Linden, S. (2014). On the relationship between personal experience, affect and risk perception: The case of climate change. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44(5), 430-440. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2008/abstract

 

van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A.A., Feinberg, G.D. & Maibach, E.W. (2015). The scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: Experimental evidence. PLoS One, 10 (2), e0118489. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118489

 

Weber, E. (2010). What shapes perceptions of climate change? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 1(3), 332-342

 

Whitmarsh, L. & Corner, A. (2017). Tools for a new climate conversation: A mixed-methods study of language for public engagement across the political spectrum. Global Environmental Change, 42, pp. 122-135. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.12.008


Previous section


Home page

The content of these webpages draws on a series of workshops created and developed by Climate Outreach and the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research as part of the Helix project.