New potentials in the communication of open science with non‐scientific publics: The case of the anti‐vaccination movement
| dc.contributor.advisor | Weingart, Peter | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Muller, Johan | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.author | Van Schalkwyk, Francois Barend | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.other | Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology. | en_ZA |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2019-01-28T14:26:05Z | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2019-04-17T08:12:58Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2019-01-28T14:26:05Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2019-04-17T08:12:58Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2019-04 | |
| dc.description | Thesis (PhD)--Stellenbosch University, 2019. | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | ENGLISH ABSTRACT: There is persistent pressure on science to be more open. But for all the fervour, scant attention has been paid to the full gamut of the potentials of openness, both positive and negative. These potentials are, in many cases, linked to open access to the formal communications of science made possible by digitisation, the internet and developments in information and communication technologies. A consequence of direct access to the formal communications of science is that traditional channels of communication are no longer the gatekeepers to the public’s understanding of science. Instead, new and different types of channels for the communication of science are proliferating in a society that is increasingly online and networked, and it is therefore reasonable to expect attentive non‐scientific publics to access the communications of science. If this is the case, then open science introduces new trajectories in its communication that are best understood with reference to flows of information in the communication networks that define the network society. It is the direct access to the communications of open science by non‐scientists that this thesis examines in order to answer the question ‘What are the potentials of open science in the communication of science?’. It does so by investigating the presence of two products of science – open research data and open access journal articles – in the online communications of a specific non‐scientific community: the anti‐vaccination movement. Specifically, it determines (1) whether the product is being accessed by the anti‐vaccination movement as indicated by references in three online spheres (Twitter, Facebook and the web); (2) whether the product is being used by the antivaccination movement as indicated by the movement’s level of engagement in each online sphere; and (3) whether there are intermediaries in the online communication networks of the antivaccination movement as indicated by mapping the movement’s online communication networks centred around the products of open science. Findings show that the anti‐vaccination movement is not accessing open research data. In the case of open access journal articles, findings show that online social networks allow the anti‐vaccination movement to amplify its minority position by being selective in terms of the vaccine science it feeds into its online communication networks, and by being highly active without engaging closely with the scientific knowledge at its disposal. In part, the amplification was found to be attributable to the presence of different types and a disproportionate number of intermediaries. The consequences of the anti‐vaccination movement’s use of open access journal articles in its online communications is the production and amplification of uncertainty around the safety of vaccinations. Science communicators will need to develop new strategies to counter the potentially detrimental health outcomes of increases in uncertainty and vaccine refusal in the broader population. This first foray into the potentials of open science shows that the development of such communication strategies will require further research to understand better how attention, influence and power function in a society increasingly defined by its global communication networks. | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Daar is aanhoudende druk op die wetenskap om meer toeganklik te wees. Tog vir al die entoesiasme is daar min aandag gegee aan die volle omvang van oop wetenskap se potensiaal, beide positief en negatief, van hierdie toeganklikheid. Hierdie potensiaal word in baie gevalle gekoppel aan vrye toegang tot die formele kommunikasies van die wetenskap wat moontlik gemaak word deur digitalisering, die internet en ontwikkelinge in inligting‐ en kommunikasietegnologie. 'n Gevolg van vrye toegang tot die formele kommunikasie van die wetenskap is dat tradisionele kommunikasiekanale nie meer die poortwagters vir die publiek se begrip van die wetenskap is nie. Nuwe en verskillende kanale vir die verspreiding van die kommunikasies van wetenskap floreer in 'n samelewing wat toenemend aanlyn is en genetwerk word. Dit is dus redelik om te aanvaar dat die aandagtige nie‐wetenskaplike publiek die kommunikasies van wetenskap raadpleeg. As dit die geval is, stel dit nuwe opsies bekend vir die kommunikasie van oop wetenskap wat verstaan kan word met verwysing na die vloei van inligting in kommunikasienetwerke wat kenmerkend is van die netwerkgemeenskap. Dit is die direkte toegang tot die wetenskaplike kommunikasies deur nie‐wetenskaplikes wat ondersoek word in hierdie tesis aan die hand van die volgende navorsingsvraag: 'Wat is die potensiaal van oop wetenskap in die kommunikasie van die wetenskap?'. Die vraag word beantwoord deur die teenwoordigheid van twee produkte van die wetenskap te ondersoek – toeganklike navorsingsdata en artikels in ooptoegangvaktydskrifte – in die aanlynkommunikasie van 'n spesifieke nie‐wetenskaplike gemeenskap: die teeninentingbeweging. Meer spesifiek, word daar bepaal (1) of die teeninentingsbeweging melding maak van die produk soos weerspieël deur verwysings in drie aanlynruimtes (Twitter, Facebook en die web); (2) of die produk deur die teeninentingsbeweging gebruik word soos aangedui deur die vlak van hul betrokkenheid in elk van die aanlynruimtes; en (3) of daar tussengangers is in die aanlyn‐kommunikasienetwerke van die teeninentingsbeweging soos bepaal deur die beweging se aanlyn‐kommunikasienetwerke se gebruik van die produkte van toeganklike wetenskap te ondersoek. Resultate toon dat die teeninentingbeweging nie toeganklike navorsingsdata gebruik nie. In die geval van artikels in ooptoegangvaktydskrifte toon die resultate dat aanlynsosialenetwerke die teeninentingbeweging toelaat om sy minderheidsposisie te versterk deur selektief te wees in terme van die entstofwetenskap wat in die beweging se aanlyn‐kommunikasienetwerke gebruik word, en deur hoogs aktief te wees sonder om in diepte aandag te gee aan die wetenskaplike kennis tot hulle beskikking. Tot 'n mate is die versterking toeskryfbaar aan die teenwoordigheid van verskillende tipes, en 'n buitensporige aantal, van tussengangers. As gevolg van die teeninentingbeweging se gebruik van artikels in ooptoegangvaktydskrifte in sy aanlyn‐kommunikasie word onsekerheid oor die veiligheid van inentings geskep en versterk. Wetenskapkommunikeerders sal nuwe strategieë moet ontwikkel om die moontlike nadelige gesondheidsuitkomste van die toenames in onsekerheid en die weiering van entstowwe in die breër bevolking teen te werk. Hierdie eerste ondersoek in die moontlikhede van oop wetenskap toon dat die ontwikkeling van sulke kommunikasiestrategieë verdere navorsing sal vereis om te verstaan hoe aandag, invloed en mag werk in 'n samelewing wat toenemend deur sy globale kommunikasienetwerke gedefinieer word. | af_ZA |
| dc.format.extent | xi, 228 pages | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/105790 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_ZA | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher | Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University | en_ZA |
| dc.rights.holder | Stellenbosch University | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Open science | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Open access publishing | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Social media | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Anti-vaccination movement | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Communication in science | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Information technology | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Open research data | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | UCTD | |
| dc.title | New potentials in the communication of open science with non‐scientific publics: The case of the anti‐vaccination movement | en_ZA |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_ZA |