Is Science “Awesome”?: Reframing the Use of Awe in Science Communication

Is Science “Awesome”?: Reframing the Use of Awe in Science Communication

Author: Daniel Silva Luna – University of Otago, New Zealand

Co-authors:

  • Jesse Bering – University of Otago, New Zealand

Science communicators regularly highlight how science is wonder-filled and awe-inspiring. Implicit to this framing is that emotions such as ‘awe’ are evoked whenever the audience is confronted with an overwhelming scientific object or idea that challenges their previously held views. This ‘awe’ inducement then presumably motivates curiosity. Because many scientists are driven by curiosity, and their outputs challenge people’s understanding, some commentators have argued that ‘awe’ plays a special role in science and its effective communication.

Within the contemporary affective literature, however, the nature of emotions is the subject of intense debate, and these disagreements have both practical and theoretical implications for how the emotion category ‘awe’ is being utilized by science communicators. For example, although many affective researchers see ‘awe’ as an innate emotion that served adaptive functions in the evolutionary past (e.g., social submission), recent work in affective science calls this view into question. In particular, Barrett’s theory of constructed emotions contends that all emotions, including ‘awe’, are culturally-relative constructions learned through a lifetime of interaction with the respective emotion categories.

Following Barrett, I argue that people learn to a certain degree to experience ‘awe’ in their interaction with science communication. This means that science is not inherently awesome, but rather is made awesome as the result of being so frequently tethered to awe-related language and visual rhetoric. In other words, people’s experiences of ‘awe’ are held together by our communicative practices.

In support of this claim, I present the results of a word-association task that compared how awe is conceptually represented by those who regularly consume science communication to those who do not. In addition, I discuss out a new research program that can trace how emotions are being used to communicate science, with the goal of better understanding the public’s affective relationship to the subject.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Insight talk
Theme: Transformation

Contact

The Network for the Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST Network) is an organisation that promotes discussion on the theory and practice of communicating science, and of public discourses about science and technology and their role in society.

Email: admin@pcst.network
Web: www.pcst.network

Incorporated in the Australian Capital Territory, Australia. Registered number AO5352.

Terms and conditions  ·  Privacy policy
Disclaimer  ·  Copyright  ·  Sitemap

Copyright © PCST

Connect

PCST is the an active and influential international academic and professional organisation in the field of science communication.

Become a member

Our email discussion list is free for everyone to join and has an international audience of over 2000 subscribers.

Join the discussion list

PCST Network has co-operation agreements with the following international organisations:

EUSEA
European Science Engagement Association

IECA
International Environmental Communication Association

RedPOP
Latin American and Caribbean Network for the Popularisation of Science and Technology