Scientists and the Popularization of Science in Early Twentieth-Century Britian

二十世纪初英国的科学家与科学普及

• 批准号: AH/E503624/1
• 负责人: Peter Bowler
• 金额: $ 3.88万
• 依托单位: Queen's University Belfast
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2007
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2007 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FE503624%2F1
• 关键词: Scientists; Popularization; Science; Early; Twentieth

This project has been developed in the context of a growing appreciation among historians of science that popular science has to be seen as something more than a top-down process in which science writers (who may be scientists, but are certainly in touch with scientists) provide simplified accounts of scientific research for passive consumption by the public. Extensive work on nineteenth-century popular science has shown how the act of popularization shapes not only public perception of science, but also science itself, as those who practice science seek to control how their work is perceived, and respond to challenges arising from the public response. The current project focusses on the early twentieth century because this was a period in which the professionalization of science had at last become more or less complete. In this sense, the situation changed significantly from that obtaining in the Victorian era, and we should expect to see the origins of the kind of relationship between scientists and the public which has continued through to the present.The project was developed in order to question the commonly-expressed view that when the scientific community became thoroughly professionalized around 1900, it began to distance itself from any involvement with the general public. The research shows that there were in fact very many scientists writing for (and later broadcasting to) a non-specialist audience, and only a few cases where the profession expressed disapproval of this- usually when an individual was thought to have given up research for popularization. The work is intended to throw light on the role played by working scientists, and by those with some scientific training, in providing non-specialist and popular literature on science. Why were they willing to do it, and what did they hope to achieve? Why did they seek to engage with the public, and what image of science did they want to project? How did they learn what was actually needed by the publishers, who were very much the gatekeepers to actual contact with the public?The project has also been concerned with the involvement of the publishers. Why did they believe there was an increasing market for popular science books and magazines, and what were their target groups in the population? How did they seek to present their publications in a way that would be attractive? In particular, the project has identified a large group of publications where it was seen to be important that the material came from an authoritative source, i.e. a professional scientist. Only at the most popular level was it thought that the expert was too specialized to do the job properly. The research shows how the publishers interacted with scientists in order to get them to produce texts at the right level for popular consumption. They also explore the actual mechanics of commissioning, editing, producing and advertising the resulting books and magazines.

这个项目是在科学史学家越来越多地认识到，科普必须被视为一种自上而下的过程的背景下制定的，在这种过程中，科学作者(他们可能是科学家，但肯定与科学家有联系)提供简化的科学研究报告，供公众被动消费。关于十九世纪科普的广泛研究表明，科普行为不仅塑造了公众对科学的看法，而且也塑造了科学本身，因为从事科学的人试图控制他们的工作如何被感知，并应对公众反应带来的挑战。目前的项目将重点放在二十世纪初，因为这是一个科学职业化最终或多或少完成的时期。从这个意义上说，这种情况与维多利亚时代的情况有了很大的变化，我们应该期待看到科学家和公众之间这种关系的起源，这种关系一直延续到现在。开发这个项目是为了质疑普遍表达的观点，即当科学界在1900年左右变得彻底专业化时，它开始与公众的任何参与保持距离。研究表明，事实上，有很多科学家为非专业观众写作(并在后来向他们广播)，只有少数几个科学家对此表示反对--通常是当一个人被认为为了普及而放弃了研究。这项工作旨在阐明在职科学家以及那些受过一些科学培训的人在提供非专业和通俗的科学文献方面所扮演的角色。他们为什么愿意这样做，他们希望达到什么目的？他们为什么寻求与公众接触，他们想要投射什么样的科学形象？他们是如何了解出版商的实际需求的？出版商在很大程度上是与公众实际接触的守门人。该项目还关注出版商的参与。为什么他们相信科普书籍和杂志的市场正在增长，他们的目标人群是什么？他们如何寻求以一种吸引人的方式展示他们的出版物？特别是，该项目确定了一大批出版物，在这些出版物中，认为材料来自权威来源--即专业科学家--是很重要的。只有在最受欢迎的级别，人们才认为专家太专业了，不能很好地完成这项工作。这项研究展示了出版商如何与科学家互动，以便让他们在合适的水平上制作适合大众消费的文本。他们还探讨了委托、编辑、制作和宣传由此产生的书籍和杂志的实际机制。