In this paper we investigate how people become engaged with open data, what their motivations are, and the barriers and facilitators program participants perceive with regard to using open data effectively.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Jack ShanleyCamillia MatukOded NovGraham Dove
This paper presents synthesized research on where XR is most effective within a museum setting and what impact XR might have on the visitor experience.
This short (approximately 2-3 hours), self-paced non-credit learning module is designed for those new to conducting research in communities impacted by energy development. You will learn about the concept of “research fatigue” and become more prepared for fieldwork by learning what to expect when you visit energy-impacted communities.
Access is free for students, researchers and those living in or serving communities impacted by energy development.
Participants who complete the online course can a digital badge called Understanding Research Fatigue. Earners of this certification will
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Suzi TaylorJulia Hobson HaggertyKristin SmithRuchie Pathak
This workbook / planning guide was designed as an outreach tool to support students and early-career researchers who are studying the social impacts of energy development and wish to better understand and mitigate “research fatigue,” a state in which citizens of a community who are already experiencing massive change may be exhausted by additional attention from researchers, the media and others outside the community.
The workbook can be used as a stand-alone resource or as a complement to the Understanding Research Fatigue online module (https://eu.courses.montana.edu/CourseStatus.awp
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Suzi TaylorJulia Hobson HaggertyJeffrey JacquetGene TheodoriKathryn Bills Walsh
In this article, we follow up on food scientists' findings that people judge new food technologies and related products (un)favourably immediately after just hearing the name of the technology. From the reactions, it appears that people use their attitudes to technologies they know to evaluate new technologies. Using categorization theory, in this study we have found that, by triggering associations with a familiar technology, a name of the new technology can be enough to determine emerging attitudes. Comparison between the technology used for categorization and another familiar technology had
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Reginald BoersmaP. Marijn PoortvlietBart Gremmen
Reflecting on the practice of storytelling, this practice insight explores how collaborations between scholars and practitioners can improve storytelling for science communication outcomes with publics. The case studies presented demonstrate the benefits of collaborative storytelling for inspiring publics, promoting understanding of science, and engaging publics more deliberatively in science. The projects show how collaboration between scholars and practitioners [in storytelling] can happen across a continuum of scholarship from evaluation and action research to more critical thinking
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Michelle RiedlingerJenni MetcalfeAyelet Baram-TsabariMarta EntradasMarina JoubertLuisa Massarani
Using their imagination and creativity, inventors have made significant contributions to our world throughout the course of human history. In recent times, a growing community has responded to the need for more intensive research on Invention Education and within the last several years has begun organizing itself around collaborative action that will accelerate the uptake and practice of Invention Education. The purpose of this document is to provide a comprehensive community-driven framework and set of principles for Invention Education that can support its growth within formal and informal
The Researching Invention Education white paper compiles contributions from a community of individuals and organizations working in Invention Education (IvE) in the United States. IvE is a term that refers to the practice of teaching students how to problem-solve and think like inventors in order to become positive change-makers in the world. The paper was written by researchers interested in IvE who attended the 2018 InventEd convening hosted by The Lemelson Foundation. The group worked together for a year to publish their findings that were then uncovered at the 2019 InventEd convening in
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Audra SkukauskaiteStephanie CouchLeslie Flynn
We characterize the factors that determine who becomes an inventor in the United States, focusing on the role of inventive ability (“nature”) vs. environment (“nurture”). Using deidentified data on 1.2 million inventors from patent records linked to tax records, we first show that children’s chances of becoming inventors vary sharply with characteristics at birth, such as their race, gender, and parents’ socioeconomic class. For example, children from high-income (top 1%) families are ten times as likely to become inventors as those from below-median income families. These gaps persist even
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Alex BellRaj ChettyXavier JaravelNeviana PetkovaJohn Van Reenen
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
This study explores the field of scientific policy advice in environmental and energy policies in France to gain insights into the role of think tanks. The field evolved along with the growth of think tanks. The think tanks refer to several orders of worth and combine them in their communication in order to qualify their expertise. The results of the study reveal that the think tanks have become more independent actors and that the field of scientific policy advice has gained autonomy. Both aspects indicate that the relationship between politics and expertise has gradually changed in France.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Thomas Lanx
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
Advances in 21st century genetic technologies offer new directions for addressing public health and environmental challenges, yet raise important social and ethical questions. Though the need for inclusive deliberation is widely recognized, institutionalized risk definitions, regulation standards, and imaginations of publics pose obstacles to democratic participation and engagement. This paper traces how the problematic precedents set by the 1975 Asilomar Conference emerge in contemporary discussions on CRISPR, and draws from a recent controversy surrounding field trial releases of genetically