Suppr超能文献

(被)误导的是什么?在数字世界中成为一个有科学素养的公民意味着什么。

(Mis)informed about what? What it means to be a science-literate citizen in a digital world.

机构信息

Department of Life Sciences Communication, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706;

Department of Life Sciences Communication, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706.

出版信息

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Apr 13;118(15). doi: 10.1073/pnas.1912436117.

Abstract

Science literacy is often held up as crucial for avoiding science-related misinformation and enabling more informed individual and collective decision-making. But research has not yet examined whether science literacy actually enables this, nor what skills it would need to encompass to do so. In this report, we address three questions to outline what it should mean to be science literate in today's world: 1) How should we conceptualize science literacy? 2) How can we achieve this science literacy? and 3) What can we expect science literacy's most important outcomes to be? If science literacy is to truly enable people to become and stay informed (and avoid being misinformed) on complex science issues, it requires skills that span the "lifecycle" of science information. This includes how the scientific community produces science information, how media repackage and share the information, and how individuals encounter and form opinions on this information. Science literacy, then, is best conceptualized as encompassing three dimensions of literacy spanning the lifecycle: Civic science literacy, digital media science literacy, and cognitive science literacy. Achieving such science literacy, particularly for adults, poses many challenges and will likely require a structural perspective. Digital divides, in particular, are a major structural barrier, and community literacy and building science literacy into media and science communication are promising opportunities. We end with a discussion of what some of the beneficial outcomes could be-and, as importantly, will likely not be-of science literacy that furthers informed and critical engagement with science in democratic society.

摘要

科学素养通常被认为是避免与科学相关的错误信息和实现更明智的个人和集体决策的关键。但研究尚未检验科学素养是否真的能做到这一点,也没有研究它需要包含哪些技能才能做到这一点。在本报告中,我们提出了三个问题,概述了在当今世界具有科学素养应该意味着什么:1)我们应该如何概念化科学素养?2)我们如何才能实现这种科学素养?3)我们可以期望科学素养最重要的成果是什么?如果科学素养要真正使人们能够在复杂的科学问题上保持知情(并避免被误导),那么它需要跨越科学信息“生命周期”的技能。这包括科学界如何产生科学信息、媒体如何重新包装和分享信息以及个人如何遇到和形成对这些信息的看法。因此,科学素养最好被概念化为包含跨越生命周期的三个维度的素养:公民科学素养、数字媒体科学素养和认知科学素养。实现这种科学素养,特别是对成年人来说,存在许多挑战,可能需要从结构的角度来看待。数字鸿沟尤其构成了一个重大的结构性障碍,而社区扫盲和将科学素养纳入媒体和科学传播则是有希望的机会。最后,我们讨论了科学素养可能带来的一些有益成果——同样重要的是,可能不会带来——这将促进民主社会中对科学的知情和批判性参与。

相似文献

2
Digital and social media opportunities for dietary behaviour change.数字和社交媒体在改变饮食行为方面的机遇。
Proc Nutr Soc. 2015 May;74(2):139-48. doi: 10.1017/S0029665114001505. Epub 2014 Oct 16.
3
Improving health literacy in patients with chronic conditions: A call to action.提高慢性病患者的健康素养:行动呼吁。
Int J Cardiol. 2018 Dec 15;273:249-251. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.08.090. Epub 2018 Aug 30.
9
The narrative truth about scientific misinformation.关于科学错误信息的叙述性真相。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Apr 13;118(15). doi: 10.1073/pnas.1914085117.
10
Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news.科学受众、错误信息和假新闻。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Apr 16;116(16):7662-7669. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1805871115. Epub 2019 Jan 14.

引用本文的文献

2
A scoping review and expert consensus on digital determinants of health.关于健康数字决定因素的范围综述与专家共识
Bull World Health Organ. 2025 Feb 1;103(2):110-125H. doi: 10.2471/BLT.24.292057. Epub 2024 Oct 29.
3
How can we make sound replication decisions?我们如何做出合理的复制决策?
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Feb 4;122(5):e2401236121. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2401236121. Epub 2025 Jan 27.
7
Students' perceptions of social issues in biology courses.学生对生物课程中社会问题的认知。
J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2024 Apr 25;25(1):e0019423. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.00194-23. Epub 2024 Feb 27.
8
Teaching epistemic integrity to promote reliable scientific communication.传授认知诚信以促进可靠的科学交流。
Front Psychol. 2024 Apr 5;15:1308304. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1308304. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

5
Social science. Science, new media, and the public.社会科学。科学、新媒体与公众。
Science. 2013 Jan 4;339(6115):40-1. doi: 10.1126/science.1232329.
6
Media Literacy Interventions: A Meta-Analytic Review.媒介素养干预措施:一项元分析综述
J Commun. 2012 Jun 1;62(3):454-472. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01643.x. Epub 2012 Apr 24.
8
The case for motivated reasoning.动机性推理的情况。
Psychol Bull. 1990 Nov;108(3):480-98. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验