(Mis)informed about what? What it means to be a science-literate citizen in a digital world.

Science literacy is often held up as crucial for avoiding science-related misinformation and enabling more informed individual and collective decision-making. But research has not yet examined whether science literacy actually enables this, nor what skills it would need to encompass to do so. In this report, we address three questions to outline what it should mean to be science literate in today's world: 1) How should we conceptualize science literacy? 2) How can we achieve this science literacy? and 3) What can we expect science literacy's most important outcomes to be? If science literacy is to truly enable people to become and stay informed (and avoid being misinformed) on complex science issues, it requires skills that span the "lifecycle" of science information. This includes how the scientific community produces science information, how media repackage and share the information, and how individuals encounter and form opinions on this information. Science literacy, then, is best conceptualized as encompassing three dimensions of literacy spanning the lifecycle: Civic science literacy, digital media science literacy, and cognitive science literacy. Achieving such science literacy, particularly for adults, poses many challenges and will likely require a structural perspective. Digital divides, in particular, are a major structural barrier, and community literacy and building science literacy into media and science communication are promising opportunities. We end with a discussion of what some of the beneficial outcomes could be-and, as importantly, will likely not be-of science literacy that furthers informed and critical engagement with science in democratic society.

What we know about effective public engagement on CRISPR and beyond.

Advances in gene editing technologies for human, plant, and animal applications have led to calls from bench and social scientists, as well as a wide variety of societal stakeholders, for broad public engagement in the decision-making about these new technologies. Unfortunately, there is limited understanding among the groups calling for public engagement on CRISPR and other emerging technologies about 1) the goals of this engagement, 2) the modes of engagement and what we know from systematic social scientific evaluations about their effectiveness, and 3) how to connect the products of these engagement exercises to societal decision or policy making. Addressing all three areas, we systematize common goals, principles, and modalities of public engagement. We evaluate empirically the likely successes of various modalities. Finally, we outline three pathways forward that deserve close attention from the scientific community as we navigate the world of Life 2.0.

Scientists' incentives and attitudes toward public communication.

In an era of large-scale science-related challenges and rapid advancements in groundbreaking science with major societal implications, communicating about science is critical. The profile of science communication has increased over the last few decades, with multiple sectors calling for such activities. As scientists respond to calls for public-facing communication, we need to evaluate where the scientific community stands. We conducted a unique census of science faculty at land-grant universities across the United States intended to spur the next generation of science communicators and research. Despite scientists' strong approval of science communication efforts, potential areas of tension, attributable to lack of institutional support and confidence in communication skills, constrain these efforts.

Believing and sharing misinformation, fact-checks, and accurate information on social media: The role of anxiety during COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic went hand in hand with what some have called a "(mis)infodemic" about the virus on social media. Drawing on partisan motivated reasoning and partisan selective sharing, this study examines the influence of political viewpoints, anxiety, and the interactions of the two on believing and willingness to share false, corrective, and accurate claims about COVID-19 on social media. A large-scale 2 (emotion: anxiety vs relaxation) × 2 (slant of news outlet: MSNBC vs Fox News) experimental design with 719 US participants shows that anxiety is a driving factor in belief in and willingness to share claims of any type. Especially for Republicans, a state of heightened anxiety leads them to believe and share more claims. Our findings expand research on partisan motivated reasoning and selective sharing in online settings, and enhance the understanding of how anxiety shapes individuals' processing of risk-related claims in issue contexts with high uncertainty.

Promises and perils of gene drives: Navigating the communication of complex, post-normal science.

In November of 2017, an interdisciplinary panel discussed the complexities of gene drive applications as part of the third Sackler Colloquium on "The Science of Science Communication." The panel brought together a social scientist, life scientist, and journalist to discuss the issue from each of their unique perspectives. This paper builds on the ideas and conversations from the session to provide a more nuanced discussion about the context surrounding responsible communication and decision-making for cases of post-normal science. Deciding to use gene drives to control and suppress pests will involve more than a technical assessment of the risks involved, and responsible decision-making regarding their use will require concerted efforts from multiple actors. We provide a review of gene drives and their potential applications, as well as the role of journalists in communicating the extent of uncertainties around specific projects. We also discuss the roles of public opinion and online environments in public engagement with scientific processes. We conclude with specific recommendations about how to address current challenges and foster more effective communication and decision-making for complex, post-normal issues, such as gene drives.

SARS-CoV-2 Wastewater Surveillance for Public Health Action.

Wastewater surveillance for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has garnered extensive public attention during the coronavirus disease pandemic as a proposed complement to existing disease surveillance systems. Over the past year, methods for detection and quantification of SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA in untreated sewage have advanced, and concentrations in wastewater have been shown to correlate with trends in reported cases. Despite the promise of wastewater surveillance, for these measurements to translate into useful public health tools, bridging the communication and knowledge gaps between researchers and public health responders is needed. We describe the key uses, barriers, and applicability of SARS-CoV-2 wastewater surveillance for supporting public health decisions and actions, including establishing ethics consideration for monitoring. Although wastewater surveillance to assess community infections is not a new idea, the coronavirus disease pandemic might be the initiating event to make this emerging public health tool a sustainable nationwide surveillance system, provided that these barriers are addressed.

An Overview of Attitudes Toward Genetically Engineered Food.

Genetically engineered food has had its DNA, RNA, or proteins manipulated by intentional human intervention. We provide an overview of the importance and regulation of genetically engineered food and lay attitudes toward it. We first discuss the pronaturalness context in the United States and Europe that preceded the appearance of genetically engineered food. We then review the definition, prevalence, and regulation of this type of food. Genetically engineered food is widespread in some countries, but there is great controversy worldwide among individuals, governments, and other institutions about the advisability of growing and consuming it. In general, life scientists have a much more positive view of genetically engineered food than laypeople. We examine the bases of lay opposition to genetically engineered food and the evidence for how attitudes change. Laypeople tend to see genetically engineered food as dangerous and offering few benefits. We suggest that much of the lay opposition is morally based. One possibility is that, in some contexts, people view nature and naturalness as sacred and genetically engineered food as a violation of naturalness. We also suggest that for many people these perceptions of naturalness and attitudes toward genetically engineered food follow the sympathetic magical law of contagion, in which even minimal contact between a natural food and an unnatural entity, either a scientist or a piece of foreign DNA, pollutes or contaminates the natural entity and renders it unacceptable or even immoral to consume.

Rethinking Social Amplification of Risk: Social Media and Zika in Three Languages.

Using the Zika outbreak as a context of inquiry, this study examines how assigning blame on social media relates to the social amplification of risk framework (SARF). Past research has discussed the relationship between the SARF and traditional mass media, but the role of social media platforms in amplification or attenuation of risk perceptions remains understudied. Moreover, the communication and perceptions of Zika-related risk are not limited to discussions in English. To capture conversations in languages spoken by affected countries, this study combines data in English, Spanish, and Portuguese. To better understand the assignment of blame and perceptions of risk in new media environments, we looked at three different facets of conversations surrounding Zika on Facebook and Twitter: the prominence of blame in each language, how specific groups were discussed throughout the Zika outbreak, and the sentiment expressed about genetically engineered (GE) mosquitoes. We combined machine learning with human coding to analyze public discourse in all three languages. We found differences between languages and platforms in the amount of blame assigned to different groups. We also found more negative sentiments expressed about GE mosquitoes on Facebook than on Twitter. These meaningful differences only emerge from analyses across the three different languages and platforms, pointing to the importance of multilingual approaches for risk communication research. Specific recommendations for outbreak and risk communication practitioners are also discussed.

Fast & easy preparation of 3D scaffolds from methyl benzoate by a diversity oriented synthesis strategy based on Diels-Alder and ene-reactions.

Thermic dimerization of methyl 1,3-cyclohexadiene 2-carboxylate gave original 3D-shape compounds by Diels-Alder cycloaddition and original [6 + 4]-ene reaction. Further selective modifications on an endo [4 + 2] cycloadduct via a diversity oriented synthesis (DOS) strategy quickly led to the preparation of a small library of original 3D scaffolds, providing access to a larger and unexplored chemical space for drug discovery processes.

Design and synthesis of novel N-sulfonyl-2-indoles that behave as 5-HT6 receptor ligands with significant selectivity for D3 over D2 receptors.

All clinically-used antipsychotics display similar affinity for both D2 (D2R) and D3 (D3R) receptors, and they likewise act as 5-HT2A receptor antagonists. They provide therapeutic benefit for positive symptoms, but no marked or consistent improvement in neurocognitive, social cognitive or negative symptoms. Since blockade of D3 and 5-HT6 (5-HT6R) receptors enhances neurocognition and social cognition, and potentially improves negative symptoms, a promising approach for improved treatment for schizophrenia would be to develop drugs that preferentially act at D3R versus D2R and likewise recognize 5-HT6R. Starting from the high affinity 5-HT6R ligands I and II, we identified compounds 11a and 14b that behave as 5-HT6R ligands with significant selectivity for D3R over D2R.

New media landscapes and the science information consumer.

Individuals are increasingly turning to online environments to find information about science and to follow scientific developments. It is therefore crucial for scientists and scientific institutions to consider empirical findings from research in online science communication when thinking about science in the public sphere. After providing a snapshot of the current media landscape, this paper reviews recent major research findings related to science communication in the online environment and their implications for science in the 21st century. Particular emphasis is given to the bias introduced by search engines, the nature of scientific content encountered online, and the potential impact of the Internet on audiences' knowledge and attitudes toward science.

Conflict or Caveats? Effects of Media Portrayals of Scientific Uncertainty on Audience Perceptions of New Technologies.

Research indicates that uncertainty in science news stories affects public assessment of risk and uncertainty. However, the form in which uncertainty is presented may also affect people's risk and uncertainty assessments. For example, a news story that features an expert discussing both what is known and what is unknown about a topic may convey a different form of scientific uncertainty than a story that features two experts who hold conflicting opinions about the status of scientific knowledge of the topic, even when both stories contain the same information about knowledge and its boundaries. This study focuses on audience uncertainty and risk perceptions regarding the emerging science of nanotechnology by manipulating whether uncertainty in a news story about potential risks is attributed to expert sources in the form of caveats (individual uncertainty) or conflicting viewpoints (collective uncertainty). Results suggest that the type of uncertainty portrayed does not impact audience feelings of uncertainty or risk perceptions directly. Rather, the presentation of the story influences risk perceptions only among those who are highly deferent to scientific authority. Implications for risk communication theory and practice are discussed.

Value predispositions as perceptual filters: Comparing of public attitudes toward nanotechnology in the United States and Singapore.

This study compares public attitudes toward nanotechnology in the United States and Singapore, using large-scale survey data in both countries. Results indicate that Singaporeans tend to be more knowledgeable about and familiar with nanotechnology than the U.S. public. Singaporeans tend to perceive greater benefits and fewer potential risks of nanotechnology, and to indicate greater support for government funding for nanotechnology than the U.S. public. Between the two countries, perceived familiarity with nanotechnology and the benefits and risks of the emerging technology tend to be interpreted differently through the lens of value predispositions (religiosity and deference to scientific authority) and therefore they indirectly affect public support. Specifically, the U.S. public tends to use religiosity to interpret benefits and Singaporeans are inclined to use religiosity to think about risks. Deference to scientific authority also moderates the impact of perceived familiarity with nanotechnology on funding support for the technology among the U.S. public.

Disentangling the influence of value predispositions and risk/benefit perceptions on support for nanotechnology among the American public.

Using nanotechnology as a case study, this article explores (1) how people's perceptions of benefits and risks are related to their approval of nanotechnology, (2) which information-processing factors contribute to public risk/benefit perceptions, and (3) whether individuals' predispositions (i.e., deference to scientific authority and ideology) may moderate the relationship between cognitive processing and risk perceptions of the technology. Results indicate that benefit perceptions positively affect public support for nanotechnology; perceptions of risk tend to be more influenced by systematic processing than by heuristic cues, whereas both heuristic and systematic processing influence benefit perceptions. People who are more liberal-minded tend to be more affected by systematic processing when thinking about the benefits of nanotechnology than those who are more conservative. Compared to less deferent individuals, those who are more deferent to scientific authority tend to be less influenced by systematic processing when making judgments about the benefits and risks of nanotechnology. Implications are discussed.

How institutional factors at US land-grant universities impact scientists' public scholarship.

The call for public scholarship to emphasize the broader impacts of science has raised questions about how universities can support this work among their scientists. This study quantitatively assesses how institutional factors shape scientists' participation in public scholarship, a subset of public engagement focusing on scientists' involvement in public debate and democratic decision-making related to science policy. Based on a 2018 survey of scientists from 46 US land-grant universities (N = 6,242), hierarchical linear modeling results show that institutional factors, including tenure guidelines and the extent of government funding, play a minor role in influencing scientists' public scholarship participation. More importantly, scientists' perceptions of the university climate on support for engagement, including support from high-level administrators and for graduate students, are significant predictors of participation in public scholarship. Ultimately, these findings support the recommendation that universities should coordinate individual motivations with institutional missions to support a broader culture of public engagement.

Examining expertise: Synthetic biology experts' perceptions of risk, benefit, and the public for research and applications regulation.

Scientific experts can play an important role in decision-making surrounding policy for technical and value-laden issues, often in contexts that directly affect lay publics. Yet little is known about what characterizes scientific experts who want lay public involvement in decision-making. In this study, we examine how synthetic biology experts' perceptions of risks, benefits, and ambivalence for synthetic biology relate to views of lay publics, deference to scientific authority, and regulations. We analyzed survey data of researchers in the United States, who published academic articles relating to synthetic biology from 2000 to 2015. Scientific experts who see less risk and are more deferent to scientific authority appear to favor a more closed system in which regulations are sufficient, citizens should not be involved, and scientists know best. Conversely, scientific experts who see more potential for risk and see the public as bringing a valuable perspective appear to favor a more open, inclusive system.

A triangulated approach for understanding scientists' perceptions of public engagement with science.

Scientists are expected to engage with the public, especially when society faces challenges like the COVID-19 pandemic or climate change, but what public engagement means to scientists is not clear. We use a triangulated, mixed-methods approach combining survey and focus group data to gain insight into how pre-tenure and tenured scientists personally conceptualize public engagement. Our findings indicate that scientists' understanding of public engagement is similarly complex and diverse as the scholarly literature. While definitions and examples of one-way forms of engagement are the most salient for scientists, regardless of tenure status, scientists also believe public engagement with science includes two-way forms of engagement, such as citizen and community involvement in research. These findings suggest that clear definitions of public engagement are not necessarily required for its application but may be useful to guide scientists in their engagement efforts, so they align with what is expected of them.

Precision of information, sensational information, and self-efficacy information as message-level variables affecting risk perceptions.

Studies that investigate how the mass media cover risk issues often assume that certain characteristics of content are related to specific risk perceptions and behavioral intentions. However, these relationships have seldom been empirically assessed. This study tests the influence of three message-level media variables--risk precision information, sensational information, and self-efficacy information--on perceptions of risk, individual worry, and behavioral intentions toward a pervasive health risk. Results suggest that more precise risk information leads to increased risk perceptions and that the effect of sensational information is moderated by risk precision information. Greater self-efficacy information is associated with greater intention to change behavior, but none of the variables influence individual worry. The results provide a quantitative understanding of how specific characteristics of informational media content can influence individuals' responses to health threats of a global and uncertain nature.

The chronic growing pains of communicating science online.

Scientists have not yet adapted to new information environments.