Science and art

In recent years, a number of people have explored the relationship between science and art. One is Cornell's own Roald Hoffmann, a chemist, poet, essayist, and connoisseur of visualizations in science. A recent essay of his explores these issues:
Hoffmann, Roald. "Blow-Up." American Scientist 95, no. 1 (2007): 20-23.
<http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/54431>

Some other reading in this area:

• Ede, Siân. "Practical Perspective: Science and the Contemporary Visual Arts." Public Understanding of Science 11, no. 1 (2002): 65-78.
• Frankel, Felice. "Communicating Science through Photography." Journal of Chemical Education 78, no. 10 (2001): 1312-14.
• Frankel, Felice. Envisioning Science : The Design and Craft of the Science Image. Cambridge, Mass. ; London: MIT Pess, 2002.
• Frankel, Felice, and G. M. Whitesides. On the Surface of Things : Images of the Extraordinary in Science. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 1997.

Who gets to be an author of a scientific article?

One recurring issue in the publication of formal scientific results is the question of "authorship." When teams work on research, who gets to be an author of the paper? A great many discussions of this have taken place. Interestingly, in the American Psychological Association's Style Guide, the way they give advice is to cite an article about authorship:
Fine, M. A., & Kurdek, L. A. (1993). Reflections on Determining Authorship Credit and Authorship Order on Faculty—Student Collaborations. American Psychologist, 48(11), 1141-1147. (May be publicly available at http://content.apa.org/journals/amp/48/11/1141.html.)

Science on TV

How good is the science on entertainment TV? Better than one might expect, it turns out -- or, at least, that's what the PR people want us to believe. Two recent stories (available to Cornell students through Nexis-Lexis, but harder to get directly online) are:

Brink, Susan. "Prime Time to Learn." Los Angeles Times, 13 November 2006.

Weed, Speed. "Pop CSI: How Science Conquered TV." Popular Science, January 2007. (May be available at http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/0bc2323776c9f010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html)

And then there's fiction....

What about promoting public understanding of science through fiction? Here's a review of a recent book that's based on changes in the ocean as a result of global climate change:
<http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/314/5805/1546>

Want to be a science journalist?

For those interested in what it's like to be a science journalist, two resources:

A blog interview with Carl Zimmer, a well-known science journalist who writes books, magazine articles, and features for the New York Times.
<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/11/8440/49578>

Some resources collected by the National Association of Science Writers
<http://www.nasw.org/resource/beginning/>

You might also want to read Deborah Blum, Mary Knudson, and Robin Marantz Henig, eds. A Field Guide to Science Writing: The Official Guide of the National Association of Science Writers. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006, available through Amazon and elsewhere.

CDC head says health comm research is crucial for future

The director of the Centers for Disease Control, Julie Gerberding, has been pushing a major reform on CDC. In an interview in Fall 2006, she include health communication as one of the key areas where more research is needed.
<http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/314/5797/246>

You can see more about health communication at CDC at
<http://www.cdc.gov/communication/healthcomm.htm>

One particular perspective is about the role of entertainment television in promoting health. The CDC website above has lots of links--here's just one interesting study:
<http://www.cdc.gov/communication/surveys/surv2001.htm>

How many hobbies involve math?

Daina Taimina, a visiting professor in Cornell's Math Department, has developed a variety of crochet projects involving mathematical figures:
<http://www.math.cornell.edu/%7Edtaimina/>
While hunting for her website, I also found a whole page of links to mathematics and knitting:
<http://www.toroidalsnark.net/mathknit.html>
And then there's the online Museum of Neuroscience Art:
<http://neuroscienceart.com/>

Cooking and science

So, if we want to understand where most people encounter "chemistry," isn't it obvious that it's in the kitchen? One person's answer to popularizing -- here's a story about a scientist who popularizes the chemistry in cooking:
<http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/314/5803/1235>

News media and uncertainty

The Nov-Dec 2006 outbreak of e.coli poisoning associated with Taco Bell provides a good example of the challenges of providing good public health information in a time of uncertainty. Although early tests suggested that green onions were the cause of the outbreak, later testing exonerated the onions. A NYTimes article explictly discussed how media coverage of an outbreak changes the flow of information, which is both good (leading to quick action) and potentially confusing (because of the uncertainty).
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/13/nyregion/13coli.html?_r=1&oref=slogin>

How do doctors communicate with each other?

If we're talking about communication "within" science, do we include the medical profession? It is in a somewhat ambiguous position -- clearly "of" science, and dependent on science, but also with an element of art and humanistic understanding in its everyday practice. This tension between the "scientific" and "humanistic" approaches to medicine is present in the communication among doctors, particularly during their training years. For an article about this tension, see
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/12/health/12docs.html?ref=science>.

Getting science info from the Internet

In various "science literacy" studies over the last decade, there have been references to how people use the Internet for science information. Now there's a good, thorough, single study on the topic. I haven't gone through it in detail yet, but I want to capture it now while I think of it. It's from the Pew Internet and American Life project.
<http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/191/report_display.asp>

Connections between public health, policy, and economics

Communication on public health issues works at multiple levels. As this New York Times story about a recent e.coli outbreak suggests, it involves at least:

• Communication among health care workers at one facility
• Communication between that facility and a central reporting agency
• Communication between that agency and similar agencies in other states (as well as the national Centers for Disease Control)
• Communication between the agency and the potential source of the illness (in this case, Taco Bell)
• Communication between the agency and the central office of the chain
• Communication between the chain and its suppliers
• Communication between the agency and the media
• Communication between the media and its readers, listeners, viewers, and surfers

There's probably more communication described in the story. Anyone see any?

"Open" science comm in a world of science-based terrorism

Science depends on open communication, at least in principle. But if you're working on the genetic basis of an epidemic, or the formula for an explosive, or whatever, do you have an obligation to NOT be open in what you say? For a current commentary, see Ehrlich, S. A. (2006). Balancing Communication and Safety. Science, 314(5804), 1387b-.
<http://sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/314/5804/1387b>

What role do patents play in "open" communication of science?

Patents pose an interesting problem for science communication -- they are both a way to ensure that technological ideas ("invention") are made public, while simultaneously protecting the ideas for exclusive use of the inventor. These purposes often come in conflict. A recent commentary on the challenges: Andrews, L., Paradise, J., Holbrook, T., & Bochneak, D. (2006). SCIENCE AND LAW: When Patents Threaten Science. Science, 314(5804), 1395-1396. <http://sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/314/5804/1395>

Science education -- what is "science literacy"?

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, several efforts to reform the science education system led to new understanding that students might learn science "better" if they actually learned less. Teachers should focus on key ideas, and not try to get students to stuff their heads full of facts, went the argument. In addition, students should have the opportunity to engage in "hands-on" or "inquiry-driven" science themselves.

Two key publications:

• National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington: National Academy Press <http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/nses/>
• American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press <http://www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/online/bolintro.htm>

Now there's a new push to reform science education, reducing even further the key ideas. The goal, again, is that by communicating "less," students will actually retain "more" -- they'll get the key ideas: Mervis, J. (2006). SCIENCE EDUCATION: Doing More With Less. Science, 314(5804), 1374-1376. <http://sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/314/5804/1374>


What do you think?