While classes for Laurentian technically started on Wednesday, for the students in my master’s program, the whole week was spent in orientation. Our classes will start on Monday, and our first assignment is due Monday at 1 p.m. So of course, being the slacker I am, I waited a whole day since learning of the assignment to finish it up.
This blog post will tell you about what I learned from the homework readings so you can get a glimpse into the sort of literature I’ll be reading all semester.
The first assignment for my class “Theories and Principles of Science Communication” was to read two chapters from the book Investigating Science Communication. The first chapter discussed the concept of upstream engagement, while the second chapter focused on transmission versus ritual models of communication.
Upstream engagement
Starting in 1985, the PUS model of science communication became firmly cemented in the UK agenda (yes, I know, the acronym is unfortunate). PUS stands for ‘public understanding of science,’ and it assumed a very one-way model of communication. In the PUS model of communication, information is understood to be sent from a producer (e.g., scientists) to a receiver (e.g., the general public), and the receiver would take the information without question. Of course, after a decade filled with the bovine spongiform encephalopathy crisis (mad cow disease), genetically-modified food fears, and the belief that vaccines cause autism, scientists came to realize that the public shouldn’t be thought of as ignorant consumers of information and need to be part of the science discovery process. Thus entered the model of upstream engagement.
As the chapter very clearly concludes,
become part of the routine practice of good science.”
When one thinks of communication, there is a good chance they will imagine it through the model of transmission. What is the transmission model? The transmission model of communication imagines communication takes place in a linear, one-way format. There is a sender (the person or group presenting the information), the message (the information being presented), and the receiver (the person or group the sender is transmitting their message to). In the transmission model, the focus is on the sender and the message. The transmission model assumes that if the sender is engaging enough, and the message clearly worded, the information will reach the receiver accurately and they will accept it with no qualms.
In contrast to the transmission model, the ritual model sees communication as a communal experience. Instead of a sender and receiver, any communication that occurs takes place in a certain scene (context) between agents of varying agencies. In simpler language, communication can never happen in a vacuum since those engaged in a conversation are situated in some place and time, and though one person may initiate the dialogue, the other people can respond to the original message and thereby form a communication. Some people in the conversation may have more or less knowledge or power in the interaction (agency), and that agency influences how the people interact.
While ritual does better at taking all the different perspectives into account when analyzing communication, that does not mean the transmission model should never be used. The transmission model does a good job helping a sender know themselves better, and in doing so improves the sender’s ability to more reliably transmit the information they intend to send. As such, using both models together is the best way to begin understanding how communication works. | Images courtesy of "Investigating Science Communication." |