Suchergebnisse

Science as a social institution that has a great impact on the formation of human capital deserves special attention. Of particular importance in this context is the issue of disseminating scientific knowledge and increasing interest in science in general. The article discusses the dynamics of studying the issues of interaction between science and society. The purpose of the article is to present an overview of the main areas of sociological studies conducted by Russian researchers in the field of examining the interaction of science and society both at the federal and regional levels. The exploration of this problem is carried out by scientists from such fields of knowledge as sociology, psychology, philosophy, journalism, economics, etc. Basing on the analysis of sources, the author has revealed that sociological research in the field of studying the interaction between science and society is carried out in several main directions. These are, firstly, studies aimed at studying the level of literacy of the population. Secondly, the study of attitudes towards the scientific community. The author makes the conclusion that the main indicators of public interest in science can be the analysis of reading popular science literature, visiting popular science and special events. For example, "Science 0+", open scientific lectures, YouTube videos, etc.

Stories have long been discussed as a tool to make science accessible to the public. The potential of stories to stimulate emotions in their audiences makes them an emotional communication strategy par excellence. While studies exist that test the effects of stories in science communication on the one hand and the effects of emotions on the other hand, there is no systematic elaboration of the mechanisms through which stories in science communication evoke emotions and how these emotions influence outcomes such as knowledge gain and attitude change. In this article, we develop a theoretical framework of the "Emotional Effects of Science Narratives" (EESN-Model), which includes a typology of emotions likely to arise from reading science communication as well as mechanisms for each of the emotions to evoke the (desired) outcomes. The model serves as a heuristic to delineate the emotional effects of narratives in science coverage and will help guide research in this domain to provide a deeper understanding of the role of emotion in science news.

Among the various institutional structures of an economy like the firm and the marketplace is one that is like no other. Science is unique. This uniqueness raises an important question: why does science exist? From an economic perspective, there are two potentially meaningful approaches to the existence of science. They both encompass institutional pluralism. A substitutes theory of comparative institutions presupposes the primacy of the commercial marketplace over firms—that firms substitute for the market when markets fail. This theory has not been used to explain the existence of science. A complements theory postulates that many simultaneous institutional responses, including science, are necessary for creating an efficient and equitable economy. The economic function of science is to produce fundamental theoretical abstractions about our world. Scientific theories are public goods that would not likely be produced within the governance structures of commercial markets and firms. The aim is to complement but not supplant traditional philosophical answers that science exists to discover truth and knowledge.