Reified versus consensual knowledge as rhetorical resources for debating climate change (notice n° 569192)

détails MARC
000 -LEADER
fixed length control field 02361cam a2200217 4500500
005 - DATE AND TIME OF LATEST TRANSACTION
control field 20250121131209.0
041 ## - LANGUAGE CODE
Language code of text/sound track or separate title fre
042 ## - AUTHENTICATION CODE
Authentication code dc
100 10 - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME
Personal name Callaghan, Peta
Relator term author
245 00 - TITLE STATEMENT
Title Reified versus consensual knowledge as rhetorical resources for debating climate change
260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC.
Date of publication, distribution, etc. 2013.<br/>
500 ## - GENERAL NOTE
General note 53
520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC.
Summary, etc. The present study explores the challenges posed when those within the scientific establishment itself publicly undermine scientific theories of political, social and environmental significance. Drawing from the Theory of Social Representations (Moscovici, 1984), and Discursive Psychology (Edwards &amp;Potter, 1992) we analyse interviews with a well-known climate change sceptic and a leading Australian climate scientist, in addition to newspaper articles written by other prominent Australian scientists holding competing views about anthropogenic climate change (ACC) to examine their respective modes of communication. We demonstrate how the two competing sides of the debate draw from different constructions of science to argue their positions on ACC in the public sphere. In particular, the consensus scientists adhere to a reified view of science and communicate using a one-way flow of information, much in line with the deficit model of science communication. They construct the public as largely deficient in knowledge, and make extensive use of facts and figures to relay information about ACC. In contrast, the sceptical scientists communicate using an interactive style, using inclusive and colloquial language to elevate common sense knowledge, intuitive feelings and the political and economic interests of the average citizen. Our study demonstrates that competing constructions of science are not simply abstract ideas but are used as rhetorical resources deployed in concrete ways to construct problematic identities for scientists, the public, and science itself.
690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN)
Topical term or geographic name as entry element climate change
690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN)
Topical term or geographic name as entry element social representations
690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN)
Topical term or geographic name as entry element information-deficit model
690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN)
Topical term or geographic name as entry element science communication
700 10 - ADDED ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME
Personal name Augoustinos, Martha
Relator term author
786 0# - DATA SOURCE ENTRY
Note Revue internationale de psychologie sociale | Volume 26 | 3 | 2013-09-25 | p. 11-38 | 0992-986X
856 41 - ELECTRONIC LOCATION AND ACCESS
Uniform Resource Identifier <a href="https://shs.cairn.info/journal-revue-internationale-de-psychologie-sociale-2013-3-page-11?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080">https://shs.cairn.info/journal-revue-internationale-de-psychologie-sociale-2013-3-page-11?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080</a>

Pas d'exemplaire disponible.

PLUDOC

PLUDOC est la plateforme unique et centralisée de gestion des bibliothèques physiques et numériques de Guinée administré par le CEDUST. Elle est la plus grande base de données de ressources documentaires pour les Étudiants, Enseignants chercheurs et Chercheurs de Guinée.

Adresse

627 919 101/664 919 101

25 boulevard du commerce
Kaloum, Conakry, Guinée

Réseaux sociaux

Powered by Netsen Group @ 2025