Translating Science

Abstract

The articles in this special issue highlight the ways in which science communication, and in particular translational communication, implicates the nuances of language. This issue is the report of the Task Force on STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) language set up by the International Association of Language and Social Psychology. The articles raise issues about the multiple stakeholders in science and their characteristic language and concepts, in contexts as diverse as health, energy production, forensic science, and science education. They point to the consequences of getting communication wrong, and to the important role of linguistics and language and social psychology in understanding this process. The articles point to a research agenda for language and social psychology researchers in this increasingly important and salient area, as we address major problems in society through the sciences.

First-Year Life Science Students’ Understanding of the Role of Plants in the Ecosystem—A Concept Network Analysis

“…The language of science builds on interconnected science concepts, and first-year university students are expected to learn to understand and use this disciplinespecific language, with its unique rules, as part of their subject studies. However, this aspect is often more or less ignored in science education, particularly at university level, although it poses challenges for novice students, who may not yet have the appropriate skills to communicate using the language of science that is designed for highly expert audiences [11].…”

Moving from Directives toward Audience Empowerment: A Typology of Recycling Communication Strategies of Local Governments

“…Knowledge can also lead to a greater sense of competency and motivation to participate in specific waste disposal behaviors in individuals [4]. However, exclusive focus on increasing knowledge can create and reinforce the idea of information deficit, which claims that the mere existence of information can sufficiently encourage people to perform the desired behavior [19]. This perception views experts as a "repository of knowledge" and expects a successful, one-way transmission of information to the nonexpert audience [20].…”

“…However, the one-way information deficit approach fails to explain that individuals have their own biases, goals, and literacy levels, all of which mediate the information translational process [19]. Typically, experts believe that the major challenges of science communication involve lack of education and misinformation from media [21].…”

“…In the recycling context, inconclusive findings on the predictive role of knowledge on recycling behavior [10], highly subjective and inaccurate public recycling knowledge patterns [10,26], and a wide value-action gap between the perceived importance and lack of actual participation in recycling [13,[27][28][29] further challenge the idea of the one-way communication model as the "appropriate status quo." This suggests a need to implement a dialogic science communication approach [19].…”

“…Engaging both experts and nonexperts through dialogic communication facilitates a shared meaning-making process of scientific knowledge, that is not only mutually understandable and usable, but also reflective of the unique needs and diverse expertise of the audience [19,20]. Specifically, effective behavioral changes have ensued from culturally adapted educational interventions that are established on trust and relationship building with key community stakeholders [30,31].…”