| Every day people are inundated with news reports about the latest scientific research. The ways in which these texts enlighten or misinform the general public is a central question in both the research literature and discussions in popular culture. However, both research and popular discussion often take on deficit views of these texts, and the capabilities of readers to critically engage with them, and treat them as static, one-way conduits that transfer information to a passive audience. In contrast, I advocate treating popular science texts as the result of a chain of consumption and production that are actively shaped by the varied perspectives of scientists, communicators, and members of the general public. My work envisions all of these actors as science learners who simultaneously act as both producers and consumers of science, and who interact with one another through in-the-moment meaning making. This dissertation examines how the meaning of scientific research is filtered and transformed in moments of interaction and knowledge construction as it moves along this pathway of science communication from scientists to the general public.;I present the results of a study that attempts to follow pieces of recent scientific research as they work their way from scientists to publication as popular science news stories, and ultimately to the public. To that end, I collected data from three types of actors involved in the paths of science communication, as well as the texts they read and generate. These actors include (1) the scientists who performed the research, (2) the reporters tasked with writing about it for popular dissemination, and (3) members of the public who must read and interpret the research. The texts I analyze include: peer-reviewed scientific journal articles, university-produced news briefs, popular press science stories, and various text-based conversations between scientists and reporters. Through an analysis of texts, individual interviews, and video-recorded interactions between actors, I demonstrate how individual meaning making shapes scientific understanding and how the problems observed in the public's understanding of science are by-products of properties of the process of science communication itself rather than the fault of individual actors. |
