• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

相似文献

1
The Problem of Trust Without Intimacy: Education for Handling Expert Knowledge in a Neoliberal Marketplace.无亲密感的信任问题:在新自由主义市场中处理专业知识的教育。
Sci Educ (Dordr). 2022;31(6):1449-1474. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00329-z. Epub 2022 Mar 1.
2
Deference and decision-making in science and society: How deference to scientific authority goes beyond confidence in science and scientists to become authoritarianism.科学与社会中的尊重与决策:科学权威的尊重如何超越对科学和科学家的信心,进而演变成威权主义。
Public Underst Sci. 2020 Nov;29(8):800-818. doi: 10.1177/0963662520962741. Epub 2020 Oct 8.
3
"Trust Me, I'm a Scientist": How Philosophy of Science Can Help Explain Why Science Deserves Primacy in Dealing with Societal Problems.“相信我,我是科学家”:科学哲学如何有助于解释为何科学在解决社会问题方面应占据首要地位。
Sci Educ (Dordr). 2022;31(5):1141-1154. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00373-9. Epub 2022 Aug 17.
4
5
Contesting epistemic authority: Conspiracy theories on the boundaries of science.挑战认知权威:科学边界上的阴谋论
Public Underst Sci. 2015 May;24(4):466-80. doi: 10.1177/0963662514559891. Epub 2014 Dec 1.
6
The positive association of education with the trust in science and scientists is weaker in highly corrupt countries.受教育程度与对科学和科学家的信任呈正相关,但这种相关性在腐败程度较高的国家较弱。
Public Underst Sci. 2024 Jan;33(1):2-19. doi: 10.1177/09636625231176935. Epub 2023 Jun 12.
7
Culture of Care: Organizational Responsibilities关怀文化:组织职责
8
Do Open-Science Badges Increase Trust in Scientists Among Undergraduates, Scientists, and the Public?开放科学徽章是否能提高本科生、科学家和公众对科学家的信任?
Psychol Sci. 2022 Sep;33(9):1588-1604. doi: 10.1177/09567976221097499. Epub 2022 Aug 24.
9
Educating future scientists towards post-patrimonial governance.培养未来科学家以实现后遗产治理。
Cult Stud Sci Educ. 2021;16(1):173-192. doi: 10.1007/s11422-020-09992-6. Epub 2020 Nov 25.
10
Openness and trust in data-intensive science: the case of biocuration.数据密集型科学中的开放性和信任:生物注释案例。
Med Health Care Philos. 2020 Sep;23(3):497-504. doi: 10.1007/s11019-020-09960-5.

无亲密感的信任问题:在新自由主义市场中处理专业知识的教育。

The Problem of Trust Without Intimacy: Education for Handling Expert Knowledge in a Neoliberal Marketplace.

作者信息

Smith Dorothy V

机构信息

School of Education, University of New England, Armidale, NSW Australia.

出版信息

Sci Educ (Dordr). 2022;31(6):1449-1474. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00329-z. Epub 2022 Mar 1.

DOI:10.1007/s11191-022-00329-z
PMID:35250177
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8886557/
Abstract

Trust arises from confidence in a person or confidence in the practices of an institution. Theorists argue that institutional trust depends, to varying extents on intrapersonal trust, which is trust between people who know each other. Science rests its claim to expert knowledge on the practices of knowledge production engaged in by its institutions. Most people cannot check these practices themselves and effectively must trust the experts who explain and vouch for those practices of science, and thus, there is an element of intrapersonal trust needed if the laity is to have trust in science. Much of the sociology of science is concerned with democratic exchanges between scientists and other citizens, in which scientists are expected to show a commitment to open-mindedness and transparency, yet this may leave scientists and their knowledge vulnerable to contestation in terms that may undermine trust in their science. In this article, I draw on data generated in a study of Australian scientists to describe the ways in which trust was important in the work of these scientists and consider the consequences for a scientist who is prepared to admit to uncertainty. Drawing upon these data and from media accounts of the COVID-19 vaccination debate in Australia, I argue that science education for contemporary society must equip scientists and the laity for relationships that are more than narrowly cognitive. I argue for an education that makes explicit the ways in which the community of science interacts to produce and verify knowledge, and that equips students to recognise uncertainty and dissent as central to science and value expert knowledge. I suggest approaches that may achieve this goal.

摘要

信任源于对一个人的信心或对一个机构实践的信心。理论家认为,机构信任在不同程度上依赖于人际信任,即相互认识的人之间的信任。科学将其对专业知识的主张建立在其机构所从事的知识生产实践之上。大多数人自己无法检验这些实践,实际上必须信任那些解释并为科学实践担保的专家,因此,如果外行要信任科学,就需要一定程度的人际信任。科学社会学的许多内容都涉及科学家与其他公民之间的民主交流,在这种交流中,科学家应该表现出开放的心态和透明度,但这可能会使科学家及其知识容易受到质疑,而这些质疑可能会破坏对他们科学的信任。在本文中,我利用对澳大利亚科学家的一项研究中产生的数据,描述信任在这些科学家工作中的重要方式,并考虑对准备承认不确定性的科学家的影响。基于这些数据以及澳大利亚关于新冠疫苗接种辩论的媒体报道,我认为当代社会的科学教育必须使科学家和外行具备建立超越狭隘认知关系的能力。我主张开展一种教育,明确科学共同体互动产生和验证知识的方式,使学生认识到不确定性和异议是科学的核心,并重视专业知识。我提出了可能实现这一目标的方法。