Science communication research over 50 years: patterns and trends

Over recent years, there has been much discussion of the status of science communication as a discipline, as a field of empirical research and theoretical reflection. In our own contributions to that discussion, we have tended to raise questions about the possibilities of this ‘emerging discipline’ (Trench & Bucchi 2010). We have some-times drawn attention to the marks of immaturity—notably, the relatively underdeveloped state of theory in the field.

But when a major international academic publisher commissions an anthology of ‘major works’ in our field, we can surely say that science communication studies have come of age. From a scattering of personal stories, manuals and essays there has emerged a growing stream of publications that now constitute a ‘literature’ in public communication of science. Analytical and critical work in science communication has consolidated in the past two decades, and the rate of publication has accelerated greatly.

Greater maturity and stability in this field do not necessarily correspond to greater visibility, as seen from outside, even by near neighbours. Science communication is still struggling for recognition as a field of study,and is probably less visible than the professional practice of science communication, as, for example, in science museums and centres. A contribution from an STS (science, technology and society) scholar to a recent edition of the Canadian Journal of Communication opened confidently: ‘The dominant approach to science communication assumes that science constitutes secure measurable knowledge that an unknowledgeable public lacks and needs’ (Bronson 2014). This statement might be less ‘unknowledgeable’ if it were qualified to suggest that this is the dominant approach within science, but it still seems to betray ignorance of the very considerable literature in science communication. Perhaps the publication of an anthology will help raise the field’s visibility.