ArticlePublic understanding of science (Bristol, England)2026
Science communication in the wild.
Article in Public understanding of science (Bristol, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Public engagement professionals: Exploring ethical tensions in communication, engagement and co-creation.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This essay argues for the need to understand and study science communication 'in the wild' - as a set of practices that are not only 'organised, explicit, and intended actions that aim to communicate scientific knowledge', but that take on a variety of other meanings as they are realised in particular contexts. I make this point by building on my experiences of studying science communication projects and by reflecting on their internal heterogeneity in terms of what they were 'about' for those organising them. By showing this diversity in the meanings of science communication to those carrying it out, and in particular how this is exacerbated by the conditions of precarity and scarcity that frequently frame science communication activities, I argue for the importance of understanding science communication practice as not only being 'about' the communication or negotiation of scientific knowledge, but myriad other aspects, from personal prestige to the need for a job.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.