[ecrea] CfP Symposium "Current Challenges to Mediatized Science Communication"

*Call for Papers*

*Interdisciplinary Symposium at the University of Rostock*

*7th – 9th of June 2018*

**

*Current Challenges to Mediatized Science Communication*

**

IAMCR-Section „Mediated Communication, Public Opinion and Society“

Department „Knowledge – Culture – Transformation“ at the 
Interdisciplinary Faculty of the University of Rostock

Organized by: Corinna Lüthje & Franziska Thiele

Science communication is constantly in transition due to technological 
and social change. Scientific frameworks and requirements are shifting. 
Science communication reacts to this and adjusts. But with new 
communication patterns come new communicative challenges and problems. 
The transformation and consequent challenges affect all areas of science 
communication, external as well as internal, public as well as across 
fields and formal as well as informal communication. The aim of this 
interdisciplinary Symposium is to discuss current challenges to science 
communication by entering into a dialogue with science communication 
researchers and colleagues of other disciplines.

Possible topics to be discussed in the Symposium are:

*1.**Scholarly Communication and New Media Technology:*

There is a noticeable increasing mobility of work media across 
disciplines in the informal scholarly communication, leading to a 
dissolution of hours and places of work. Social media not only offer the 
opportunity to connect with other scientists, but also to spread 
information that before could only be shared with the public via 
classical mass media. The emergence of open access publications presents 
science communication with many new challenges.

Questions for this topic could be: What media are being used for what 
kind of science communication? What are problems these different media 
cater to? How has scholarly communication among scientists changed? Are 
there any differences between disciplinary and interdisciplinary science 
communication and what do they look like? What impact do academic social 
networking sites have? Which disciplines prefer using which type of 
publications and why? Which advantages and disadvantages do different 
types of publications on- and offline present?

*2.**Complexity and Uncertainty in Science and Risk Societies:*

When communicating with the public scientists frequently ask themselves 
how much reduction of complexity is necessary to present results in a 
comprehensible manner without oversimplifying them. The question is 
closely connected to the concern that journalists might describe and 
interpret knowledge and the process of knowledge production incorrectly.

Furthermore, in scientific risk assessment or prognosis scientists make 
statements with a high degree of uncertainty that is difficult to 
communicate. How complex may science present itself? What role do 
different forms of external science communication play in different 
disciplines? How accurate can scientists assess the risks of 
technological innovations? How are risks communicated by scientists? 
Have the relationships between scientists and journalists changed? How 
is the external and internal perception of science communication with 
the public? How much uncertainty can the communication of science with 
stakeholders or the public take?

*3.**Fake News and Science – Crisis of Credibility and Confidence:*

Fake news in relation to politics are currently considered to be a 
pressing problem. For science their dissemination is equally 
problematic. Fake news can weaken the confidence in science and lead 
science into a crisis of credibility. Can science hinder the 
dissemination of fake news or even prevent it? Has the emergence of fake 
news changed the communication with stakeholders and if so, how? What 
forms of communication and media are used to communicate with 
stakeholders and what works best? How can public trust in science be 
increased and a crisis of credibility prevented?

*4.**Participatory Science:*

Participatory science offers a great opportunity to improve of 
communication between scientists and the public.

By involving non-scientist agents and including indigenous knowledge 
when developing innovative technologies and creating new scientific 
knowledge risk perception and resistance can be decreased and 
acceptance, transfer and implementation of innovations increased. A 
deeper understanding of the mechanics of science among the public can 
reduce insecurity and strengthen trust in science. The understanding of 
scientists for processes and sensitivities outside of science can be 
improved as well. This is likewise the case with public scientific 
presentations and events. Questions for this topic could be: What forms 
of participatory science exist until today? Are there rules to involve 
stakeholders in scientific processes? If so: What rules should be 
followed when doing participatory science? What are best practice 
examples or new, promising forms of participatory science? What are 
experiences with participatory science?

Submissions of scientists from all disciplines looking at science 
communication from a disciplinary or interdisciplinary perspective and 
topics and questions not mentioned above at are welcome.

The *abstracts* should not contain more than *300 words* and can be sent 
in a PDF format via email to (corinna.luethje /at/ uni-rostock.de) 
<mailto:(corinna.luethje /at/ uni-rostock.de)>or 
(franziska.thiele /at/ uni-rostock.de) 
<mailto:(franziska.thiele /at/ uni-rostock.de)>until the *15th of February 2018*.

A publication with selected contributions to the Symposium is planned.


---------------
The COMMLIST
---------------
This mailing list is a free service offered by Nico Carpentier. Please
use it responsibly and wisely.
--
To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit http://commlist.org/
--
Before sending a posting request, please always read the guidelines at
http://commlist.org/
--
To contact the mailing list manager:
Email: (nico.carpentier /at/ vub.ac.be)
URL: http://nicocarpentier.net
---------------