Understanding “understanding” in <i>Public Understanding of Science</i>

Huxster, Joanna K.; Slater, Matthew H.; Leddington, Jason; LoPiccolo, Victor; Bergman, J.; Jones, Mack H.; McGlynn, Caroline; Diaz, Nicolas; Aspinall, Nathan; Bresticker, Julia; Hopkins, Melissa

doi:10.1177/0963662517735429

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As they argue, without some level of understanding little meaningful thinking can occur and reliance on cues will be more likely. Understanding can be described as “ grasp[ing] how a constellation of facts relevant to that subject are related to one another ….in such a way as to be able to make new connections or draw new inferences with novel information” (Huxster et al , 2018, p. 759). What is a fact is often not clear to those listening to messages.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

It’s the REAL thing: contested media discourse and the UK Sugar Tax

Daniel

O'Sullivan²,

Harris³

2022

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeHealth policies often require individuals to limit behaviours deemed enjoyable or suffer other burdens. This leads to considerable and contested discourse often played out in the popular media. The aim of this study is to determine the effects of such contested media discourse on viewers' perceived attitude change towards the target behaviour.Design/methodology/approachCombining concepts from discourse analysis and marketing-psychology elaboration models, the authors undertook an online survey in which a large sample of the public (N = 855) watched parts of a real daytime news debate on the UK Sugar Tax. The authors then evaluated the effects of this discourse on the perceived understanding of the tax and perceived attitude change to the consumption of sugary drinks.FindingsParticipants differentiated between parts of the discourse related to facts and arguments (termed argument-related discourse devices) and parts related to the format and tone of the debate (termed debate-/speaker-related discourse devices). Contrary to what might be expected, debate-/speaker-related discourse devices, which might be thought of as subjective, appeared to effect positive perceived attitude change through a cognitive processing route that involved perceived improved understanding. The argument-related discourse devices, which may appear objective or rational, were not associated with perceived improved understanding but were directly associated with positive perceived attitude change.Originality/valueGiven the authors' interest in the relationship between discourse and perceived attitude change, the authors take the novel step of linking concepts from discourse analysis with models of attitude change taken from the marketing-psychology domain. Furthermore, the authors' large-scale survey “democratises” discourse analysis, allowing non-expert participants to reflect upon discourse.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

It’s the REAL thing: contested media discourse and the UK Sugar Tax

Daniel

O'Sullivan²,

Harris³

2022

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, some have argued that previous attempts to provide coherent and comprehensive accounts of understanding are part of the problem. Rather than furthering our understanding, the resulting definitions, have contributed to the current limited appreciation of understanding in teaching, learning and assessment (White and Gunstone 1992), as evidenced by the lack of clarity found in much education curricular documentation where the terms 'knowledge' and 'understanding' are frequently employed loosely, ambiguously and interchangeably (Huxster et al 2018;Smith and Siegel 2004).…”

Section: Baumberger Et Al 2017)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The view of understanding apparent in this metaphor is that understanding is an intellectually demanding epistemic state (Huxster 2018;Janvid 2018); a conscious and deliberate endeavour that goes beyond knowing (Strevens 2013) and involves making connections between pieces of information and inferring correct descriptions. To understanding something is to know what it is and to make reasonable sense of it (Baker cited in Grimm 2011).…”

Section: [Insert Table 6 Here]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing, grasping and constructing: pre-service teachers’ metaphors for ‘understanding’ in religious education

Walshe

2020

British Journal of Religious Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite its centrality to most, if not all educational endeavours, what is meant by understanding is highly contested. Using Religious Education (RE) in England as a case subject this paper examines pre-service secondary school teachers' construals of understanding. It does so by employing conceptual metaphor theory to analyse their linguistic discourse. Specifically, it examines the metaphors employed by participants in a series of focus group discussions (FGD) and provides important insights into how understanding is conceptualised by these pre-service teachers who are preparing to enter the RE profession. The metaphors employed by these pre-service teachers ('understanding is SEEING'; 'understanding is CONSTRUCTING'; 'understanding is GRASPING'), focus on the dynamic and developmental nature of understanding (rather than on the outcomes) and reveal subject specific ways of thinking and practicing. This paper argues that each of the three conceptual metaphors employed by participants suggest particular ways of acting towards understanding with significant implications for teaching and learning in RE.

show abstract

“…Shen's initial gloss of it is also typical: it is "in the interest of everybody…to gain a better understanding of science and its applications…. Such an understanding might be called 'science literacy'" (1975, 265).6 Previous research has shown that epistemic success terms like 'knowledge' and 'understanding' are often left undistinguished from one another or even conflated in the scholarly literature on scientific literacy and the public understanding of science(Huxster et al 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and Trusting Science

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science communication via testimony requires a certain level of trust. But in the context of ideologically-entangled scientific issues, trust is in short supply -particularly when the issues are politically "entangled". In such cases, cultural values are better predictors than scientific literacy for whether agents trust the publicly-directed claims of the scientific community. In this paper, we argue that a common way of thinking about scientific literacy -as knowledge of particular scientific facts or concepts -ought to give way to a second-order understanding of science as a process as a more important notion for the public's trust of science.

show abstract

Understanding “understanding” in Public Understanding of Science

Cited by 13 publications

References 42 publications

It’s the REAL thing: contested media discourse and the UK Sugar Tax

It’s the REAL thing: contested media discourse and the UK Sugar Tax

Seeing, grasping and constructing: pre-service teachers’ metaphors for ‘understanding’ in religious education

Understanding and Trusting Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About