Science Communication as a Collective Intelligence Endeavor: A Manifesto and Examples for Implementation
Research output: Journal contributions › Comments / Debate / Reports › Research
Standard
In: Science Communication, Vol. 45, No. 4, 08.2023, p. 539-554.
Research output: Journal contributions › Comments / Debate / Reports › Research
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Science Communication as a Collective Intelligence Endeavor
T2 - A Manifesto and Examples for Implementation
AU - Holford, Dawn
AU - Fasce, Angelo
AU - Wulf, Marlene
AU - Kause, Astrid
AU - Tapper, Katy
AU - Demko, Miso
AU - Lewandowski, Stefan
AU - Hahn, Ulrike
AU - Abels, Christoph M.
AU - Ahmed, Al-Rawi
AU - Sameer, Alladin
AU - Boender, Sonja T.
AU - Bruns, Hendrik
AU - Fischer, Helen
AU - Gilde, Christian
AU - Hanel, Paul H.P.
AU - Herzog, Stefan M.
AU - Lehmann, Sune
AU - Nurse, Matthew S.
AU - Orr, Caroline
AU - Pescetelli, Niccolò
AU - Petrescu, Maria
AU - Sa, Sunita
AU - Schmid, Philipp
AU - Sirota, Miroslav
AU - Wulf, Marlene
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2023.
PY - 2023/8
Y1 - 2023/8
N2 - Effective science communication is challenging when scientific messages are informed by a continually updating evidence base and must often compete against misinformation. We argue that we need a new program of science communication as collective intelligence—a collaborative approach, supported by technology. This would have four key advantages over the typical model where scientists communicate as individuals: scientific messages would be informed by (a) a wider base of aggregated knowledge, (b) contributions from a diverse scientific community, (c) participatory input from stakeholders, and (d) better responsiveness to ongoing changes in the state of knowledge.
AB - Effective science communication is challenging when scientific messages are informed by a continually updating evidence base and must often compete against misinformation. We argue that we need a new program of science communication as collective intelligence—a collaborative approach, supported by technology. This would have four key advantages over the typical model where scientists communicate as individuals: scientific messages would be informed by (a) a wider base of aggregated knowledge, (b) contributions from a diverse scientific community, (c) participatory input from stakeholders, and (d) better responsiveness to ongoing changes in the state of knowledge.
KW - collective intelligence
KW - epistemic diversity
KW - knowledge aggregation
KW - knowledge updating
KW - participatory input
KW - science communication
KW - Psychology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85152895225&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/33c3a388-fa2f-3d89-ae38-1a0b11ce07f9/
U2 - 10.1177/10755470231162634
DO - 10.1177/10755470231162634
M3 - Comments / Debate / Reports
C2 - 37994373
VL - 45
SP - 539
EP - 554
JO - Science Communication
JF - Science Communication
SN - 1075-5470
IS - 4
ER -