Saretzki Thomas
Institut für Politikwissenschaft und Zentrum für Demokratieforschung, Leuphana Universität Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Deutschland.
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2019 Aug;144-145:78-83. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2019.05.008. Epub 2019 Jun 12.
Scientific findings are often not adopted and utilized as assumed and intended by their producers and mediators. These gaps in the uptake and use of scientific "evidence" induce reflections on the communication between science and its addressees in society. If "politics" is conceived as an addressee, could its members be identified as a "target group"? What are the knowledge needs of policy-makers? What do they expect not only in terms of "the evidence" provided, but also with regard to the role that its producers play in processes of counselling? And how do these expectations fit together with the models of counselling and communication that producers of scientific knowledge presuppose in the framework of evidence-based policy-making?
科学发现往往没有像其生产者和传播者所设想和期望的那样被采用和利用。科学“证据”在吸收和使用方面的这些差距引发了对科学与其社会受众之间沟通的反思。如果将“政治”视为受众,其成员能否被确定为一个“目标群体”?政策制定者的知识需求是什么?他们不仅在提供的“证据”方面有何期望,而且在其生产者在咨询过程中所扮演的角色方面有何期望?这些期望如何与科学知识生产者在循证决策框架中预先假定的咨询和沟通模式相契合?