The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts
Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 15 Sayı: 8 Sayfa Aralığı: 4009 - 4034 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 İndeks Tarihi: 17-05-2021
The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts
Öz: In the early 1960s, first in the USA and Britain and then in many countries, the debates initiated byscientists that the public's interest in scientific developments is gradually decreasing, the sense of trust inscientists is also weakening, which will endanger the future of the countries, has started to be influential in theworld of science and politics. When the surveys conducted at that time began to confirm these concerns, itraised the question of how to find a solution to this problem. This issue has attracted the attention of almostevery segment of society from academics to politicians. The concerns that the public is less and less interestedin the developments in science and technology, that their trust in scientists is decreasing, and that this endangersthe future of the countries, was expressed by scientists for the first time, and this problem started to be discussedin the context of science and politics. In the 1980s, some social scientists developed the "deficit model", inother words the "knowledge deficit" model, to help to solve this problem. The Knowledge Deficit model isbased on the assumptions that the public is unaware of the basic scientific facts, therefore exhibits negativeattitudes towards science and some scientific applications, they distrust scientists, and if the basic scientificfacts are taught to the public, they will develop attitudes that support science and scientific practices, and willstart to trust scientists. In this study, the Cross Ignorance approach, which examines the assumptions on whichthe Knowledge Deficit model is based, in terms of different variables is proposed. The Knowledge Deficitmodel, which asserts that there is an information gap in the public and that if this gap is filled, attitudes willdevelop in the public to support scientific developments and scientists, has not considered the possibility thatthere may be an information gap in scientists and journalists who are are expected to play an important role infilling the supposed information gap in the public. This paper proposes the Cross Ignorance approach, whichclaims to contribute to developing attitudes in the public to support science and to build trust in scientists. TheCross Ignorance approach looks at this issue from a different perspective than the Knowledge Deficit modeldoes. The Cross Ignorance approach is important in terms of proposing a different perspective to researchers,which can contribute to the elimination of the scientist-journalist conflict, and ultimately to PublicUnderstanding of Science efforts
Anahtar Kelime: Çapraz Bilgisizlik Yaklaşımı, Bilim İnsanları ve Gazeteciler Arasındaki Çatışmayı Sona Erdirebilir ve Bilim Çabalarının Halk Tarafından Anlaşılmasına Katkıda Bulunabili
Öz: 1960'ların başında önce ABD ve İngiltere'de, daha sonra birçok ülkede bilim adamlarının başlattığı, halkın bilimsel gelişmelere olan ilgisinin giderek azaldığı, bilim insanlarına duyulan güven duygusunun da zayıfladığı, bunun da ülkelerin geleceğini tehlikeye atacağı yönündeki tartışmalar, bilim ve siyaset dünyasında etkili olmaya başlamıştır. O dönemde yapılan anketlerin de bu endişeleri doğrular nitelikte sonuçlar vermeye başlaması, bu soruna nasıl çözüm bulunacağı konusunu gündeme getirmiştir. Bu konu akademisyenlerden, politikacılara kadar toplumun hemen her kesiminin ilgisini çekmiştir. Halkın bilim ve teknolojideki gelişmelere gittikçe daha az ilgi gösterdiği, bilim adamlarına olan güveninin azaldığı ve bunun da ülkelerin geleceğini tehlikeye attığı endişeleri ilk kez bilim adamları tarafından dile getirilmiş ve bu sorun bilim ve siyaset bağlamında tartışılmaya başlamıştır. 1980'lerde bazı sosyal bilimciler bu sorunu çözmeye yardımcı olmak için "eksiklik modeli", diğer bir deyişle "bilgi eksikliği" modelini geliştirmiştir. Bilgi Eksikliği modeli, halkın temel bilimsel gerçeklerden habersiz olduğu, bu nedenle bilime ve bazı bilimsel uygulamalara karşı olumsuz tavırlar sergilediği, bilim adamlarına güvenmediği ancak halka temel bilimsel gerçekler öğretilirse, bilimi ve bilimsel uygulamaları destekleyen ve bilim adamlarına güven duyan tutumlar geliştireceği varsayımına dayanmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, Bilgi Eksikliği modelinin dayandığı varsayımları farklı değişkenler açısından inceleyen Çapraz Bilgisizlik yaklaşımı önerilmektedir. Halkta bir bilgi eksikliği olduğunu ve bu boşluğun doldurulması halinde halkta bilimsel gelişmeleri ve bilim adamlarını destekleyecek tutumların gelişeceğini ileri süren Bilgi Eksikliği modeli, bu sözde boşluğun doldurulmasında önemli bir rol oynaması beklenen bilim adamları ve gazetecilerde de bilgi eksikliği olabileceği olasılığını göz önünde bulundurmamıştır. Konuya Bilgi Eksikliği modelinden daha farklı bir perspektiften bakan bu çalışma, halkta bilimi destekleyen ve bilim insanlarına güven duyan tutumlar geliştirmeye katkıda bulunacağını savunan Çapraz Bilgisizlik yaklaşımını önermektedir. Çapraz Bilgisizlik yaklaşımı, araştırmacılara, bilim insanı-gazeteci çatışmasının ortadan kaldırılması ve sonuçta, Halkın Bilim Anlayışı çalışmalarına katkıda bulunabilecek farklı bir bakış açısı önermesi bakımından önemlidir.
Anahtar Kelime: Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- Allgaier, J., Dunwoody, S., Brossard, Lo, Y. & Peters, H. P. (2013). Medialized science? Neuroscientists’ reflections on their role as journalistic sources. Journalism Practice, 2013 Vol. 00, No. 00, 1-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2013.802477
- Barel-Ben David Y, Garty ES, Baram-Tsabari A (2020) Can scientists fill the science journalism void? Online public engagement with science stories authored by scientists. PLoS ONE 15(1): e0222250. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222250
- Bhattacharya, A. (29 Eylül 2011). Scientists should not be allowed to copy-check stories about their work. Science and Skepticism-Notes & Theories. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2011/sep/29/scientists-copy-check-stories
- Bauer, M.W. (2009). The evolution of public understanding of science - discourse and comparative evidence. Science, Technology and Society, 14 (2). pp. 221-240. ISSN 0971-7218
- Besley, J.C. & Tanner, A. H. (2011). What Science Communication Scholars Think About Training Scientists to Communicate. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547010386972
- Boon, S. (19 Nisan 2015). To communicate or to excommunicate? Is that the scientist versus journalist question? Canadian Science Writers’ Association. http://sciencewriters.ca/2015/04/09/to-communicate-or-to-excommunicate-is-that-thescientist-versus-journalist-question/
- Boykoff, MT. (2009). Creating a Climate for Change: Communicating Climate Change and Facilitating Social Change. Glob. Environ. Polit. 9 (2) 123-128
- Breckler, S. J. (2008). Public understanding of science. Science Directions. December 2008, Vol 39, No. 11. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2008/12/sd
- Britt, R. R. (2009). Do scientists and journalists get along? http://www.livescience.com/5690- scientists-journalists.html
- Brockway, L. (2002, August 09). Scientists and Journalists: Worlds Apart. AAAS.ORG. http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2002_08_0 9/nodoi.13174110920058361754/
- Brownell, S.E., Price, J.V. & Steinman, L. (2013) Science communication to the general public: Why we need to teach undergraduate and graduate students this skill as part of their formal scientific training. The Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education 12(1): E6–E10.
- Burnham, J. (1987). How Superstition Won and Science Lost: Popularizing Science and Health in the United States. New Brunswick, Rutgers University Press
- Burns, T.W., O’Connor D.J. & Stocklmayer, S.M. (2003) Science communication: A contemporary definition. Public Understanding of Science 12: 183–202.
- Cadieux-Shaw, L. (2013). Scientists and journalists: why can't they just get along? Kings Journalism Review. http://thekjr.kingsjournalism.com/?p=11887
- Chambers, C., & Summer, P.(2012). Science journalism through the looking glass. the School of Psychology, Cardiff University. http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2012/jul/11/how-improve-science-journalism
- Colón-Ramos, D., Kirschner, E. & Rather, D.(October 30, 2018). What Journalists and Scientists Have in Common.https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/what-journalists-andscientists-have-in-common/
- Dean, C. (2008, March 13). Disconnect: The Gulf Between Scientists and Journalists. Juniata Voices. https://www.juniata.edu/offices/juniata-voices/media/Disconnect%20- %20Cornelia%20Dean%20-%20Juniata%20Voices.pdf
- de Semir, V. (2010, May 12-13). Science Communication & Science Journalism. www.mediaforscience.com
- Dunwoody, S. (2008). Science journalism. In The Handbook of Public Communication of science and Technology (1st ed.) (pp. 15-30). Routledge
- Dunwoody, S. Eight questions to ask when interpreting academic studies: A primer for media.(2015). Journalist's Resource: A project of the Harvard Kennedy School's Shorenstein Center and the Carnegie-Knight Initiative. http://journalistsresource.org/tipsheets/research/interpreting-academic-studies-primer-media#
- Englehardt, K. (2015).Trust in Science: Problem (not quite) solved. Academia, Communication Strategy, Media Relations, Public Outreach, Scicomm, Science Communication, University - Higher Ed Communication. http://www.scilogs.com/the-leap/trust-in-science-problemnot-quite-solved/
- Ève Maillé, E., Saint-Charles, J., & Lucotte, M. (2010). The gap between scientists and journalists: the case of mercury science in Québec’s press. Public Understand. Sci. 19(1) (2010) 70–79
- Fahy, D., & Nisbet, M. (2011). The science journalist online: Shifting roles and emerging practices Journalism, 12 (7), 778-793 https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911412697
- Feldman, J. & Wihbey, J. (19 Nisan 2015). Eight questions to ask when interpreting academic studies: A primer for media. Journalist’s Resource. Shorenstein Center Harvard Kennedy School. https://journalistsresource.org/tip-sheets/research/interpreting-academic-studiesprimer-media
- Furay, S. (2010, June 8). the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Sciece Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America. Originally published in CSA News, September 2009. http://common-breath.com/science-and-journalism-understanding-the-relationship/
- Gill, J. (2012, March 14). How can scientists actively engage with the media? http://contemplativemammoth.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/how-can-scientists-activelyengage-with-the-media/
- Goldstain, M. (2011). Scientists vs. Journalists: A Field Guide. http://deepseanews.com/2011/10/scientists-journalists-a-field-guide/
- Grimes, D.R. (08 Kasım 2016). Impartial journalism is laudable. But false balance is dangerous. The Guardian. Science Notes & Theories. https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2016/nov/08/impartial-journalism-is-laudablebut-false-balance-is-dangerous
- Hartz, J. ve Chappel, R. (1997). Worlds apart- How the distance between science and journalism threatens America’s future. www.worldfreedom.org. Nashville: First Amendment Center
- Hayes, R., ve Grossman, D. (2010). Bilim İnsanının Medya Rehberi . (1.Baskı). (M. Kayı, Çev.). TÜBİTAK Popüler Bilim Kitapları
- Handwerker, J. (2020). Why Shannon Weaver models is mother of all? https://askinglot.com/whyshannon-weaver-models-is-mother-of-all
- Handwerker, J.Impacts of science journalism on public understanding of science. CAISE: Center for the Advancement of Informal Science Education. http://www.informalscience.org/research/wiki/Impacts-of-science-journalism-on-publicunderstanding-of-science
- Iverson, M. (2001, April). Should there be an oath for scientists and engineers? Summary of The AAAS Committee on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility meeting held on September 27, 2000. https://www.aaas.org/programs/scientific-responsibility-human-rights-law/shouldthere-be-oath-scientists-and-engineers
- Iverson, M.Journalists vs Scientists: Who to trust. (2015). Environmental Journalism: Practice and theory where the media meets the environment. http://www.gettysburgcollegeitt.org/ES241/?p=628
- Kearnes, M., Macnaghten, P. & Wilsdon, J. (2006). Governing at the nanoscale: people, policies and emerging technologies. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/30050340_Governing_at_the_nanoscale_people_ policies_and_emerging_technologies
- Kennedy, D. & Overholser, G.(Eds.). (2010).Science and the Media. the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. http://amacad.org/pdfs/scienceMedia.pdf
- Kennedy, J. (2017). The ‘deficit model’ only works half the time when you’re fighting chemophobia. https://jameskennedymonash.wordpress.com/2017/08/22/the-deficit-model-only-workshalf-the-time-when-youre-fighting-chemophobia/
- Kloor, K. (2012, January 18). The Rift Between Journalism and Science. http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2012/01/the-rift-between-journalism-and-science/
- Koelsche, C. (1965). Scientific literacy as related to the media of mass communication. School Science and Mathematics 65:719-25
- LaFollette, M.C. (1990). Making Science Our Own: Public Images of Science, 1910- 1955. University of Chicago Press.
- Lenart, M. (2010). Journalist and scientists have different roles but they share a goal-An informed public. Arizona Water Resource, Joe Gelt ed.,vol. 18, no. 1,8 pp.,Water Resources Research Center , Winter, 2010. The Arizona University
- Lévy-Leblond, J.-M. (1992). About misunderstandings about misunderstandings. Public Understanding of Science, 1(1), 17–21. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/1/1/004
- Lewenstein, B. V. (2003, June, 16). Models of Public Communication of Science & Technology. https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/43775/mod_resource/content/1/Texto/Lewenstein %202003.pdf
- Lewenstein, B. V. (1998). “Editorial,” Public Understanding of Science 7 (1998): 1–3.
- Lewenstein, B. V. (1992). Public understanding of science in the United States after World War II. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231582111. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963- 6625/1/1/009
- Littlemore, R. (2007, September 07). Why Scientists Fear Journalists. DESMOG Clearing The PR
- Pollution That Coluds Climate Science. https://www.desmogblog.com/why-scientists-fearjournalists ManuscriptEdit. (2012). Why Communication Skills Are So Important. https://www.manuscriptedit.com/scholar-hangout/why-communication-skills-areimportant/
- Maillé, M.& Saint-Charles, J. ve Lucotte, M.(2010). The gap between scientists and journalists: the case of mercury science in Québec's press. Sage Publications. Public Understand. Sci. 19(1) (2010) 70–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509102690
- Marken, G. A. “Andy.” (2001). Journalists vs PR People…We’re Making the Bullets They Shoot. Public Relations Quarterly, 46(2), 29–31.
- Miller, J.D. (1992). “Toward a scientific understanding of the public understanding of science and technology,” Public Understanding of Science 1 (1992): 23–26.
- Miller, J.D. (1987). The American People and Science Policy: The Role of Public Attitudes in the Policy Process. Pergamon Press.
- Miller, J.D. (1983) Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus 112(2): 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516629749
- McNair, B. (2005). What is journalism? In Making Journalists : Diverse Models, Global Issues. eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost). Routledge.
- Nakkazi, E. (2013, September 25). What journalists want from scientists and why. http://www.scidev.net/global/communication/practical-guide/what-journalists-want-fromscientists-and-why.html
- Nelkin, D. (1987). The Culture of Science Journalism. Society, 24(6), 17-25.
- Oriare, P. (2008). Barriers Between Scientists and Journalists: Myth or Reality? ATPS Special Paper Series No. 35. Nairobi: ATPS Communications Department. http://www.atpsnet.org/Files/special_paper_series_35.pdf
- Pearson, J. (2012, December 11). Why don't journalists write about scientists the way they write about chefs? http://jmxpearson.com/2012/12/11/why-dont-journalists-write-aboutscientists-the-way-the-write-about-chefs.html
- Pemberton, M. (2014).Why scientists, not journalists, are bad for your health. The daily Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11290053/Why-scientists-not-journalistsare-bad-for-your-health.html.
- Peters, H. P. (2013). Gap between science and media revisited: Scientists as public communicators. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(Suppl 3), 14102–14109. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212745110
- Peters, H. P. Public understanding of science. (2000). Select Committee on Science and Technology. House of Lords. . Chapter 3. Third Report
- Randall, D. (2016). The Universal Journalist: Vol. 5th revised edition. Pluto Press.
- Ransoff, D.F., & Ransoff, M.R. (2001). Sensationalism in the Media: When Scientists and Journalists May Be Complicit Collaborators. Effective Clinical Practice. July/August 2001. Volume 4. Number 4
- Rehman, J. (2013, May 13). The need for critical science journalism. Peer review and scientific publishing. Notes & Theories. The Guardian.
- Reichel, C. (2019, November 22). Research-based tips for reporting on science research. Journalist’s Resource. https://journalistsresource.org/tip-sheets/research/research-communicatingscience-dietram-scheufele/
- Rensberger, B. (n.d.). Covering Science-What every journalist should know. Australian Science Media Center. https://www.smc.org.au/for-media/tips-on-reporting-science
- Resnick, B. (2019, June 11). Hyped-up science erodes trust. Here’s how researchers can fight back. https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/6/11/18652225/hype-science-press-releases
- Schmidt, C. W. (2009). Communication Gap: The Disconnect Between What Scientists Say and What the Public Hears. Environmental Health Perspectives, 117(12), A548–A551. volume 117 | number 12 | December 2009
- Science and the media: From ideas to action. ( 2011, March). Expert Working Group Report. Australian Science Media Centre. https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018- 10/inspiring_australia-science_and_the_media-from_ideas_to_action_2011.pdf
- Science and the Media: Securing the Future. (2010, January). Science and the Media Expert Group.
- Science Media Centres. https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/science-and-the-media-expertgroup-report-securing-the-future/
- Science and Technology - Third Report (2000: Ch 3/1). House of Lords. Publications on the internet
- Science and Technology Committee Publications. Chapter 3/1. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office
- Seakins A. & Hobson M. (2017) Public Understanding of Science. In: Taber K.S., Akpan B. (eds) Science Education. New Directions in Mathematics and Science Education. SensePublishers, Rotterdam
- Shamos, M.H., Koballa, T., Kemp, A., & Evans, R. (1997).The Myth of Scientific Literacy; Thomas Koballa, Andrew Kemp, and Robert Evans, “The spectrum of scientific literacy: An in-depth look at what it means to be scientifically literate,” The Science Teacher 64, no. 7 (1997): 27– 31.
- Shamos, M.H., Koballa, T., Kemp, A., & Evans, R. (1997).Science and the media: From ideas to action (March 2011). Expert Working Group Report. https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018-10/inspiring_australiascience_and_the_media-from_ideas_to_action_2011.pdf
- Sumner, P., Vivian-Griffiths, S., Boivin, J., Williams, A., Venetis, C. A., Davies, A., Ogden, J., Whelan, L., Hughes, B., Dalton, B., Boy, F., & Chambers, C. D. (2014). The association between exaggeration in health related science news and academic press releases: retrospective observational study. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 349, g7015. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7015
- Rotblat, J. (1999, November 19). A hippocratic oath for scientists". Science. Vol. 286. Issue 5444. pp. 1475. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.286.5444.1475
- Russell, C. (2006). Covering Controversial Science: Improving Reporting on Science and Public Policy. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237505859_Covering_Controversial_Science_Im proving_Reporting_on_Science_and_Public_Policy/stats
- Russell, C. (2006). Science and the Media Expert Group report: Securing the Future (2010, January 3).https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/science-and-the-media-expert-group-reportsecuring-the-future/
- Smith, D. (2018, January 03). Scientists and Journalists Square Off Over Covering Science and ‘Getting it Right. https://undark.org/2018/03/01/science-journalism-fact-checking-quotes/
- Shipman, M. ( 2012, Jan 31). The Promise & Pitfalls of Public Outreach Part 1: What Scientists, Science Writers and PIOs Should Expect From Each Other. http://www.nature.com/spoton/2012/01/what-scientists-science-writers-and-pios-shouldexpect-from-each-other/
- Sides, J. (2008, May 6). On the Relationship between Journalism and Social Science. http://themonkeycage.org/2008/05/06/on_the_relationship_between_jo_1/
- Simis, M. J., Madden, H., Cacciatore, M. A., Yeo, . K. (2016). The lure of rationality: Why does the deficit model persist in science communication? Public Understanding of Science 2016, Vol. 25(4) 400–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516629749
- Sumner, P., Vivian-Griffiths, S., Boivin, J., Williams, A., Venetis, C. A., Davies, A., Ogden, J., Whelan, L., Hughes, B., Dalton, B., Boy, F., & Chambers, C. D. (2014). The association between exaggeration in health related science news and academic press releases: retrospective observational study. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 349, g7015. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7015
- Taylor, H. R. (1979). How we see the process and problems of science communication. Proceedings of the National Agricultural Science Information Conference, "popular Reporting of Agricultural Science, Strategies for Improvement" Held at the Scheman Continuing Education Building, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, October 22-26, 1979
- Taylor, H. R. (1979). The public understanding of science. (1985). A report by the Council of the Royal Society The Royal Society of London
- Taylor, H. R. (1979).The Science Council.(n.d.). https://sciencecouncil.org/about-science/our-definition-of-ascientist/
- Treise, D., & Weigold, M. F. (2002). Advancing Science Communication: A Survey of Science Communicators. Science Communication, 23(3), 310–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/107554700202300306
- Turney, J. (1996). Public understanding of science. The Lancet. Volume 347. Issue 9008. Pages 1087-1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(96)90283-4.
- Ward, L.(2015). Is slack science reporting letting down the public? https://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2015/mar/24/is-slack-sciencereporting-letting-down-the-public?CMP=share_btn_tw
- Ward, S. J. A. (2008, May 10). How Print Reporters and Editors Construct their Science Stories.The Importance of the Editor in Science Journalism. http://www.sciencejournalism.net/importance_of_editor.html
- Weaver, D. (2005). Who are journalists? In Making Journalists : Diverse Models, Global Issues. eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost). London & New York: Routledge.
- Williams, A. & Clifford, S. (November 2009). Mapping the Field: Specialist science news journalism in the UK national media. The Risk, Science and the Media Research Group Cardiff University School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies. http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/resources/Mapping_Science_Journalism_Final_Report_20 03-11-09.pdf
- Wilkes, J. (2002). Training scientists to be journalists. Science and Society. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1307590/ doi: 10.1093/emboreports/kvf225
| APA | Yeşil M, BULDUKLU Y (2020). The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts. , 4009 - 4034. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| Chicago | Yeşil M. Murat,BULDUKLU YASİN The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts. (2020): 4009 - 4034. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| MLA | Yeşil M. Murat,BULDUKLU YASİN The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts. , 2020, ss.4009 - 4034. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| AMA | Yeşil M,BULDUKLU Y The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts. . 2020; 4009 - 4034. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| Vancouver | Yeşil M,BULDUKLU Y The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts. . 2020; 4009 - 4034. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| IEEE | Yeşil M,BULDUKLU Y "The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts." , ss.4009 - 4034, 2020. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| ISNAD | Yeşil, M. Murat - BULDUKLU, YASİN. "The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts". (2020), 4009-4034. https://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| APA | Yeşil M, BULDUKLU Y (2020). The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts. Turkish Studies (Elektronik), 15(8), 4009 - 4034. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| Chicago | Yeşil M. Murat,BULDUKLU YASİN The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts. Turkish Studies (Elektronik) 15, no.8 (2020): 4009 - 4034. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| MLA | Yeşil M. Murat,BULDUKLU YASİN The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts. Turkish Studies (Elektronik), vol.15, no.8, 2020, ss.4009 - 4034. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| AMA | Yeşil M,BULDUKLU Y The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts. Turkish Studies (Elektronik). 2020; 15(8): 4009 - 4034. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| Vancouver | Yeşil M,BULDUKLU Y The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts. Turkish Studies (Elektronik). 2020; 15(8): 4009 - 4034. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| IEEE | Yeşil M,BULDUKLU Y "The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts." Turkish Studies (Elektronik), 15, ss.4009 - 4034, 2020. 10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
| ISNAD | Yeşil, M. Murat - BULDUKLU, YASİN. "The Cross Ignorance Approach Can End the Conflict Between Scientists and Journalists and Contribute to the Public Understanding of Science Efforts". Turkish Studies (Elektronik) 15/8 (2020), 4009-4034. https://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.46865 |
