This study explores whether the emphasis of science news websites on dissemination over dialogue corresponds to the actual preferences of their science-oriented audiences. Based on interviews with science news website administrators (n = 8) and readers (n = 20) and two reader questionnaires (n = 89; n = 55), we found that readers favor dissemination, yet certain readers may also desire interactive discussions. Readers perceive the ability to comment as beneficial for readers and administrators; however, they do not expect administrators to engage in dialogue. Younger audiences showed a somewhat greater preference for online dialogic communication than their older counterparts.

Participation in citizen science, a research approach in which nonscientists take part in performing research, is a growing practice in schools. A main premise in school-based citizen science is that through their participation, students and teachers make meaningful contributions to the advancement of science. However, such initiatives may encounter difficulties in drawing on students' and teachers' knowledge and incorporating their voice in research processes and outcomes, partly due to established knowledge hierarchies in both science and schools. This research theoretically examines misuses of students' and teachers' knowledge in school-based citizen science that can be defined as an epistemic injustice. This term describes wrongful evaluations and considerations of people's knowledge or perspectives. Based on existing theoretical work on epistemic injustice, we first map out epistemic justifications for public participation in science and discuss deficiencies in current forms of citizen science that lead to the perseverance of epistemic injustice. Then, we identify and characterize four forms through which epistemic injustice may be manifested in school-based citizen science. Our theoretical analysis is complemented by illustrative examples from citizen science projects enacted in schools, demonstrating cases where epistemic injustice toward students and teachers was either instigated or mitigated. We discuss implications toward educational goals and the design of school-based citizen science, suggesting that epistemic injustice can be reduced or avoided by delegating authorities to schools, maximizing teacher and student agency, and leveraging schools' community connections. Overall, this research establishes theoretical grounds for examinations of epistemic injustice in school-based citizen science.

A guiding theory for a continuous and cohesive discussion regarding generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in science communication is still unavailable. Here, we propose a framework for characterizing, evaluating, and comparing AI-based information technologies in the context of critical engagement with scientific information in online environments. Hierarchically constructed, the framework observes technological properties, user experience, content presentation, and the context in which the technology is being used. Understandable and applicable for non-experts in AI systems, the framework affords a holistic yet practical assessment of various AI-based information technologies, providing both a reflection aid and a conceptual baseline for scholarly references.

Recent research has highlighted the role of science education in reducing beliefs in science-related misinformation and stressed its potential positive impact on decision-making and behavior. This study implemented the Elaboration Likelihood Model to explore how individuals' abilities and motivation interact with the type of processing of scientific information in the peripheral vs. central persuasion routes. A representative sample of adults (N = 500) completed an online questionnaire during the second wave of COVID-19 (November 2020) focused on two COVID-19-related dilemmas involving social distancing recommendations. First, we examined whether relying on misinformation was associated with participants' stances and the complexity of their arguments and found that relying on misinformation was associated with the intention to reject social distancing recommendations and with the use of simple arguments. Second, we explored how motivation, operationalized as personal relevance, and abilities, operationalized as the highest level of science education, science knowledge, and strategies to identify misinformation, were associated with viewpoints and justifications. We found that personal relevance was associated with the intention to reject the recommendations but also with more complex arguments, suggesting that people did not intend to reject scientific knowledge but rather tended to contextualize it. Abilities were not associated with stance but were positively correlated with argument complexity. Finally, we examined whether motivation and abilities are associated with relying on scientific misinformation when making science-related decisions. Respondents with higher levels of science education and motivation relied less on misinformation, even if they did not necessarily intend to follow the health recommendations. This implies that motivation directs people to greater usage of the central processing route, resulting in more deliberative use of information. Science education, it appears, impacts the information evaluation decision-making process more than its outcome.

Numerous studies have explored internal factors such as cultural values and acquired knowledge accounting for how people engage with science. However, it remains unclear how external factors embedded in science texts relate to audience engagement. A content analysis of 298 text-based popular science news articles and their following 5852 reader comments was conducted in two Israeli audiences, science-minded and general readers, to explore how the accessibility strategies embedded in these articles relate to cognitive, affective, and behavioral engagement. Findings indicated similar patterns of relationship between accessibility strategies and engagement expressions for both audiences; however, the relationships were more pronounced for general readers compared to science-minded readers. Using jargon and a narrative writing style increased the odds of positive emotions in reader comments, whereas addressing socio-scientific issues increased the odds of cognitive expressions. These results may contribute to a fuller understanding of ways to drive meaningful public engagement.

Genetic counseling (GC) following abnormal Down syndrome (DS) screening tests aims to ensure learning of complex medical concepts and discussion of counselees' personal desires. Pre-GC use of electronic learning tools (e-learning tools) can facilitate GC sessions by allowing more time for dialogue rather than learning medical and genetic concepts, enabling greater focus on the counselee's decisional, psychological, and personal needs. Few studies have investigated such tools for DS screening tests and those who have focused on screening uptake rather than abnormal results and implications. This study evaluated prenatal GC outcomes following implementation of an e-learning tool utilizing an educational animated movie for couples of varied ethnic backgrounds in northern Israel, with abnormal DS screening tests. E-learning tool impact was assessed as knowledge level, informed choices, satisfaction with the intervention and GC process, the state of anxiety and duration of the GC meeting. The 321 study participants were randomized to three groups: animation movie, booklet, and control. All participants had been asked to complete pre- and post-counseling questionnaires. Outcome scores were compared between the research groups. Results showed increased knowledge level in general among participants in the animation group; among minority participants, the highest knowledge level was in the animation group. Anxiety levels and informed choices were not statistically different among the groups. However, watching the animation, Jewish ethnicity, good level of genetic literacy, and academic degree were significant predictors of informed choice, and those who watched the animation were three times more likely to make an informed choice than the control group. Our findings suggest that this e-learning tool is efficient and acceptable for the general population. Special attention is needed for minorities with lower genetic literacy and education.

This theoretical paper focuses on the social processes of public engagement with science and their implications for science education. The core of our argument is that science education should help people become better at evaluating, using, and curating their epistemic networks to make personal and civic decisions and to understand the natural world. In this context, an epistemic network is a set of people who support sensemaking by providing new information and aiding in the interpretation and reconstruction of scientific knowledge in context. We believe epistemic networks are an important consideration for science education, particularly when misinformation plays an outsized role in the cultural landscape. Understanding when epistemic networks are useful and how science education should incorporate them requires a clear sense of how they work in different contexts. We start by contrasting the inevitably social nature of all public engagement with science with the particularly social or interpersonal nature of some public engagement with science. We draw on research from education, communication, and science and technology studies to develop the idea of an epistemic network and to describe two basic types: the individual resource network and the collective action network. We illustrate each type with an extended example that is hypothetical but informed by both research and experience. Finally, we discuss how science education can incorporate epistemic networks, as well as the challenges inherent in that educational strategy.

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) aims to provide couples with information to make informed decisions. Since 2013, the Israeli Carrier Screening Program has been offered routinely and free of charge to all Israelis of reproductive age, personalized based on religion, ethnicity, and village/tribe where a disorder is frequent. This study evaluated the impact of two educational tools on an informed choice on RGCS uptake and satisfaction with counselling within a heterogeneous population in northern Israel. Participants from diverse sociodemographic population groups were randomly assigned to watch an animated film, read a booklet conveying the same information, or receive no information before counselling for RGCS, and asked to complete pre- and post-counselling questionnaires. A higher informed-decision rate was demonstrated in the film (n=93/141, 66%) and booklet (n=88/131, 67%) groups vs. the non-intervention group (n=62/143, 43%) (P<0.001), assessed by the Multidimensional Measure of Informed Choice. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that allocation to an intervention group, Jewish ethnicity and higher education level, best predicted informed choice. Most participants expressed high levels of satisfaction with the counselling process, regardless of group assignment. While only a minority of participants reported seeking information prior to visiting the clinic, the pre-counselling information interventions were well accepted. Pre-counselling self-learning educational tools should be promoted, easily available, and adjusted linguistically and culturally to targeted populations, to avoid unwanted “automatic” compliance of tested individuals and maximize the potential of informed decision-making. Our study can be applied to other countries where majority and minority ethnic groups access genetic services.

This study contributes to the growing body of science communication research showing gaps between theory and practice objectives, focusing on one particular understudied and emerging science communication innovation.The objectives and practices of four Israeli science news websites were analyzed considering three science communication models: “Dissemination”, “Dialogue”, and “Participation.” Using concurrent parallel mixed methods, we examined the perspectives of website administrators (n=8) and readers (n=20) through interviews, a content analysis of news items (n=298), discussion threads (n=507), and reader questionnaires (n=89). Findings indicate limited adoption of two-way communication about how science is applied in society. The scant implementation of the dialogue model suggests its promises are not concretized in practice on these science news websites.

A recent wave of studies has diversified science communication by emphasizing gender, race, and disability. In this article, we focus on the understudied lens of religion. Based on an analysis of ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) science journalism and its readership, we identify four main strategies for tailoring science, which we call the four “R”s—removing, reclaiming, remodeling, and rubricating science. By analyzing how science communication is produced by and for a particular religious group, we reveal the diverse ways a religious-sensitive science communication is shaped by community gatekeepers, while also exploring the ethical and epistemological tensions this tailoring entails.