Papers in English by Per Hetland
Nordic Journal of Science and Technology Studies, 2020
How do civic educators and citizen communities co-construct access, interaction, and participatio... more How do civic educators and citizen communities co-construct access, interaction, and participation and bridge contributory and democratized citizen science? This study builds on interviews and observations with amateur naturalists, professional biologists, and public authorities about their participation in the Species Observations System (SO)-Norway's largest citizen science (CS) project. Over more than twenty years, CS has been understood as either contributory (contributing with data) or democratized (emancipating the pursuit of science). Following these models, CS studies has developed a number of classifications of CS projects. The present article aims to bridge contributory CS and democratized CS by using the access, interaction, and participation (AIP) model outlined by Carpentier, without extending the number of classifications. Access and interaction signify contributory CS. Well-functioning technology is a precondition for joining the ranks of records, contributors, validators, and institutional actors. Interaction is the second founding stone of participation, and organizations are crucial to facilitating interaction. Participation signifies democratized CS. The choice of technology involves important dimensions of power, as technology structures actions. However, the ability to build and sustain the technological infrastructure also illustrates that participation is organizational power, enacted both from the bottom-up and top-down.
Communicating Science: A Global Perspective, 2020
Denmark, Norway and Sweden all have a rich history of science communication. Popularisation effor... more Denmark, Norway and Sweden all have a rich history of science communication. Popularisation efforts by the scientific community have co-existed and co-developed with efforts to make science communication useful for the purposes of democracy, education, farming, environmental protection, industrial development, public health, social welfare and more. One of the challenges faced in all three countries is how to match the demands of the academic community, particularly attuned to specialist, technical communication, with the demands of society (including most academics), hoping to share, make useful and critically discuss the fruits of research. The enactment of the third mission for all public universities serves as a modern example of such a match, but also shows the difficulties involved. There are many similarities across the three countries covered in this chapter, such as an ongoing emphasis on the role of science communication in enforcing citizenship, public deliberation and social responsibility, but also many differences. The making of modern science communication in Scandinavia also testifies to the fact that Denmark, Norway and Sweden are—and always have been—firmly embedded in international developments.
Seminar.net, 2020
The status of inclusivity in current educational practices warrant an examination to ascertain th... more The status of inclusivity in current educational practices warrant an examination to ascertain the primary aim of inclusive education or education for all. Drawing on the classroom observations of a single case study, we analysed the use of the teacher-mediated video material 'Teachers for All' to explore the application of the AIP model (i.e., access, interaction and participation) analysing the teaching and learning process. Two teacher educators and 11 in-service teachers from one regional training centre (out of six regional training centres) participated in the study. We conclude that the AIP model provide three advantages. First, Carpentier's AIP model provide a theoretical framework for analysing and building bridges between special needs education, where access signifies presence, and interaction socio-communicative relationships, and inclusive education, where participation signifies co-deciding and power. Second, the AIP model provide a theoretical and methodological framework to analyse the dimensions of technology, content, people and organisations of a specific digitalised social learning environment. Third, the AIP model is useful understanding the ambiguities between teacher-centred versus learner-centred pedagogy.
A History of Participation in Museums and Archives: Traversing Citizen Science and Citizen Humanities, Routledge, 2020
Citizen Science (CS) and Citizen Humanities (CH) are increasingly engaging people in participator... more Citizen Science (CS) and Citizen Humanities (CH) are increasingly engaging people in participatory and contributory activities that support research conducted by universities, museums and archives. These relatively new terms describe different types of public interactions with tangible and intangible cultural, natural, and scientific heritage, often involving digital archives, museum collection databases, or crowdsourcing platforms. Although public involvement with the work of science and cultural heritage research institutions is not a modern phenomenon, the rapid development and accessibility of digital tools is broadening and transforming knowledge practices in significant ways. Emerging from different trajectories of disciplinary and professional development, citizen projects in the sciences and in the humanities are not easily compared. This chapter approaches topics in Citizen Science and Citizen Humanities as tacking stitches, binding disciplines in the exploration of shared, pertinent questions: In which ways do perspectives on democratization inform communication models in citizen science and citizen humanities? How are knowledge and communication practices in citizen projects in the sciences and humanities organized? What are the respective and shared motivations of institutions and volunteers? What are some emergent trends and issues in the development of citizen science and citizen humanities and how are these relevant for museum and heritage studies? The chapter identifies principles, challenges, and implications of public participation in citizen projects on both general and domain-specific levels, and introduces the interdisciplinary background and approach in this book: A History of Participation in Museums and Archives: Traversing Citizen Science and Citizen Humanities.
A History of Participation in Museums and Archives: Traversing Citizen Science and Citizen Humanities, Routledge, 2020
As the notion of citizen science (CS) has developed within the natural sciences, social sciences,... more As the notion of citizen science (CS) has developed within the natural sciences, social sciences, and the humanities, researchers and practitioners have concentrated on scientific or educational outcomes, and on the partnership between academia and society. The “citizens” in citizen science, however, have been under-theorized. A variety of terms are used to describe citizens including volunteers, participants, amateurs, lay people, and lay scientists, as well as users, publics, and audiences. This chapter focuses on three terms–users, publics, and audiences–and considers how these terms, far from being interchangeable, reflect distinct conceptions of citizens from the fields of innovation studies, science and technology studies, and media studies. Each concept describes which spaces citizens access and how they access them; how citizens interact with each other socially and communicatively; and how we think about participation. We argue, therefore, that the concepts of users, publics, and audiences can extend recent discussions that link participation in CS to the terms used to refer to people, or citizens who are involved. It is furthermore important to remember that scientists are also citizens, and that they all partake in different constructions of users, publics, and audiences.
A History of Participation in Museums and Archives: Traversing Citizen Science and Citizen Humanities, Routledge, 2020
This chapter focuses on building knowledge infrastructures for citizen science, and the importanc... more This chapter focuses on building knowledge infrastructures for citizen science, and the importance of reciprocity. The study is based on a web survey about Species Observation (SO), a national biodiversity mapping activity that facilitates bridging activities between science and different publics in new manners. Within citizen science, the participants’ motivation to participate is much studied. However, we claim that by building knowledge infrastructures which facilitate reciprocity, one builds a long-lasting relationship between the participants and the activity undertaken. These kinds of relationships do not primarily build on a one-way motivation to contribute, but on a reciprocal relationship where all parties gain something. Two findings are crucial. First, the new knowledge infrastructure facilitates both uploading and downloading information; downloading information is a very important activity—examples are private field diaries, searching for information, looking at recent records, looking at statistics, and looking at inventories. Second, the users emphasize individual interests—examples are competition, displaying their own pictures, studying others’ pictures, learning something new, spending more time outdoors, increasing their own knowledge, and most importantly, keeping track of their own records.
Public Understanding of Science, 2019
This article investigates how scientists at natural history museums construct publics in science ... more This article investigates how scientists at natural history museums construct publics in science communication and identifies four major constructions based on Braun and Schultz categories: the general public, the pure public, the affected public, and the partisan public. This study draws on data from 17 research scientists at two natural history research museums in Norway who were interviewed about their public outreach activities focusing on practices, settings, designated outcomes, scientists' incentives to communicate science, and, finally, the speaking positions available for the different publics; the aim was to provide an understanding of the four constructed publics in museums' science communication. When scientists construct different publics, they emphasize relevance as an important quality assurance device.
Three key questions guide this thesis.
First, how is public communication of science and technol... more Three key questions guide this thesis.
First, how is public communication of science and technology (PCST) organized in different models of expert–public interaction?
Second, how do different models of science and technology popularization frame science and technology narratives?
Third, building on the first two questions, what are the implications of these models for the social contract between science and society?
This thesis involves both an exploratory cross-case analysis of PCST and a comparative mixed-methods study. The case studies were conducted using a broad array of methods: reviewing policy documents, articles from 3 newspapers over 12–18 years, and the study of participation in experiments and new infrastructures for doing citizen science through documents, observations, and interviews.
This thesis has eight crucial contributions to an improved understanding of public communication of science and technology.
By critically examining the three science communication models, dissemination, dialogue and participation, the thesis makes five contributions: 1) a study of how public appreciation of science and technology are promoted by the use of bias; 2) a study of how public engagement with science and technology are promoted by mediatization processes; 3) a study of how researchers in their popularization activities promote critical understanding of science and technology being modest witnesses; 4) a study of the dialogue models’ room for participation in knowledge and policy construction processes; and 5) in studying the participation model, a better understanding of citizen science and boundary infrastructures.
Finally, the thesis has three more general contributions: 6) it represents the first comprehensive examination of science communication policy in Norway; 7) focusing on technology, it links science communication research and innovation studies; and 8) it contributes to a more analytical approach studying the three science communication models as trading zones within the context of the Nordic model of science communication.
When journalists popularize a highly topical new technology, such as the Internet, they situate t... more When journalists popularize a highly topical new technology, such as the Internet, they situate their popularization within technological expectations; when researchers popularize it, they situate their popularization within both a retrospective and prospective understanding of technological change. Following this, journalists are inclined to appeal to emotionally involved users or pioneers, and researchers are inclined to appeal to responsible citizens. Hence, journalists immodestly dramatize the future by boosting a new technology or turning its risks into threats, while researchers acting as " modest witnesses " pour oil in troubled waters, indicating skepticism about the journalistic approach. Consequently, the technology popularization field is structured in two dimensions: from public appreciation of technology via public engagement to critical understanding of technology in public, and from expectation-based argumentation to research-based argumentation.
Several concepts are used to describe ethnographic approaches for investigating the Internet; com... more Several concepts are used to describe ethnographic approaches for investigating the Internet; competing concepts include virtual ethnography, netnography, digital ethnography, web-ethnography, online ethnography, and e-ethnography. However, as the field matures, several writers simply call their approach "ethnography" and specify new fields of practice. In this paper, we will explore the content of ethnographic approach for investigating the Internet and the direction in which this new field of ethnography is moving, that is, whether it is the study of blended worlds or online worlds. We start by introducing the emerging field sites or fields of practice. Then, we describe how participant observation and other data collection techniques are carried out. Next, we describe how ethnographic practice is understood within the emerging field. Finally, we discuss some possible changes in the ethnographic landscape: unobtrusive methods, the communal-commercial relationship, and team-ethnography.
In popular science and technology writing, “boosterism” is prominent. Writers overwhelmingly
desc... more In popular science and technology writing, “boosterism” is prominent. Writers overwhelmingly
describe science and technology in enthusiastic terms, thereby promoting the deficit
or Public Appreciation of Science and Technology model (PAST). A crucial aspect of
the PAST model is its pro-innovation bias: writers enroll chaperones in the texts, such as
spokespersons, users, celebrities, witnesses, experts, and authorities, to support their claims.
Both “boosterism” and pro-innovation bias constrain the public’s critical understanding of
science and technology. This study includes a detailed exploration of pro-innovation bias in
the popularization of the Internet in the Norwegian press and how journalists use chaperones
to support their claims. The author demonstrates that, in popularizing the Internet, proinnovation
bias manifests several other biases, such as individual-praise, pro-technology,
individual-blame, technology-blame, and source biases.
Nordic Journal of Science and Technology Studies, Dec 20, 2014
Three models of expert-public interaction in science and technology communication are central: th... more Three models of expert-public interaction in science and technology communication are central: the dissemination model (often called the deficit model), the dialogue model, and the participation model. These three models constitute a multi-model framework for studying science and technology communication and are often described along an evolutionary continuum, from dissemination to dialogue, and finally to participation. Underlying this description is an evaluation claiming that the two latter are “better” than the first. However, these three models can coexist as policy instruments, and do not exclude each other. Since 1975, concerns with public engagement over time have led to a mode that is more dialogical across the three models within science and technology communication policy in Norway. Through an active policy, sponsored hybrid forums that encourage participation have gradually been developed. In addition, social media increasingly allows for spontaneous public involvement in an increasing number of hybrid forums. Dialogue and participation thus have become crucial parts of science and technology communication and format public engagement and expertise.
Nordicom Review, Vol 33 (2) pp. 3-15, Dec 17, 2012
The Internet has often been envisioned as a technological utopia, framed by the rhetoric of hope.... more The Internet has often been envisioned as a technological utopia, framed by the rhetoric of hope. However, after studying the popular discourse, three meta-narratives are identified: utopian narratives containing the pro-innovation position; dystopian narratives containing the anti-diffusion position; technology-as-risk narratives containing the control position. While narratives of anti-diffusion are more or less invisible, narratives of control are surprisingly absent from the scientific discourse about the Internet. The present article sets out to explore narratives of control as they were presented in the Norwegian press during the 1995-2006 period. We have also studied how the expectancy cycles of the Internet fluctuate over time within this period. The study supports two general conclusions: (1) the expectancy cycles for the Internet in the mass media fluctuate in a manner comparable with the stages of the innovation-decision process and; (2) the control position promotes individual, social, technological and institutional control, and is more prominent when the Internet is lower on the media agenda.
Education, both at the University of Stirling, aimed to shed light on this question and provide a... more Education, both at the University of Stirling, aimed to shed light on this question and provide a basis for a sustained engagement with the actor-network theory. They are well aware that their attempt to bring order to the field might domesticate it; however, their attempt is to explore what has and can be done in education. Fenwick and Edwards claim that pedagogy centres around, and is constantly mediated by, material things. This is also a central claim made by Latour who states that 'Without the nonhuman, humans would not last a minute' (Latour, 2004, p. 91). The myriad of elements that constitute teaching and learning are important to the authors. They called the first chapter a way to intervene, not a theory of what to think. This is important since ANT focuses not on what text and other things mean, but on what they do. They explore important concepts in ANT like translation, networks and agency. The translation model explains innovations as temporary interpretations of nature, of technological potentials, of the strategies of competitors in the market and different interests. While the diffusion of innovation model focuses on the transmission of the same artefact, the translation model reveals a continuous transformation of the artefact. The strength of the translation model is that it can encompass still undecided controversies, while the diffusion of innovation model refers to established facts and machines. The authors claim that translation provides a new language and a richly materialised conception to intervene more precisely and more honestly, within the messiness and multiplicity that make up those processes that we refer to as learning and teaching, curriculum and pedagogy, educational implementation, reform and evaluation.
Sometimes more effort is put into predicting the revolutionary futures of digital technologies th... more Sometimes more effort is put into predicting the revolutionary futures of digital technologies than in actually studying how the same technologies are being incorporated into daily life. The introduction of digital technologies has therefore from time to time lead to a certain hybris (Hetland & Meyer-Dallach, 1998;. The present collection of contributions is an attempt to study how digital resources participate in specific learning practices, as they may teach us about the materiality of learning ). The materiality of learning also allows us to undertake a more ecological approach by focusing on both intended and unintended effects, as well as the interplay between learners, teachers, digital resources and policy. The four selected contributions discussed in this editorial present the co-evolution of hybrid minds and external memory systems. They show how learning from multiple digital resources requires additional, diverse skills and competences than those required for learning from textbooks. They show how feedback clickers can be used to overcome some challenges lecturers have in large plenary lectures. They also highlight the relationships between teachers' experiences with ICT-supportive school leaders, ICT-supportive colleagues, the perceived usefulness of computers, the perceived learning outcomes for students and teachers' use of computers in their teaching.
English abstract "Science 2.0" is still evolving; basically, it is an ongoing, "natural" experime... more English abstract "Science 2.0" is still evolving; basically, it is an ongoing, "natural" experiment about a potentially novel way of participating in knowledge construction processes based on Internet applications. The topic of this article is scientific culture and organisation that interact with communities of interests outside of institutions, based on analyses of systematic biology and the mapping of biodiversity. The focus will be on the convergence of professionals and so-called amateurs involved in the production of new knowledge.
idunn.no
Technology testing provides arenas for interaction between users and producers. In the experiment... more Technology testing provides arenas for interaction between users and producers. In the experiments potential user needs and user-values regarding new technology are communicated to facilitate invention and diffuse innovation. This article provides a framework for discussing how users contribute to both the knowledge and policy construction processes when participating in technology testing.
The story of how Internet is communicated in order to promote particular individual and societal ... more The story of how Internet is communicated in order to promote particular individual and societal priorities leads to a re-evaluation of science and technology communication. 1 Producers and consumers of new technological knowledge take part in complex and constantly changing relationships with one another. Their relationships have important social and cultural undertones. Here, with my starting point in the traditional media's communication of the Internet, I shall therefore focus on two interrelated research questions: (1) How do the traditional media and the public interact to understand new media technology and (2) How do we understand this type of interaction in science and technology communication?
Researching ICTs in Context, Jan 1, 2002
Uploads
Papers in English by Per Hetland
First, how is public communication of science and technology (PCST) organized in different models of expert–public interaction?
Second, how do different models of science and technology popularization frame science and technology narratives?
Third, building on the first two questions, what are the implications of these models for the social contract between science and society?
This thesis involves both an exploratory cross-case analysis of PCST and a comparative mixed-methods study. The case studies were conducted using a broad array of methods: reviewing policy documents, articles from 3 newspapers over 12–18 years, and the study of participation in experiments and new infrastructures for doing citizen science through documents, observations, and interviews.
This thesis has eight crucial contributions to an improved understanding of public communication of science and technology.
By critically examining the three science communication models, dissemination, dialogue and participation, the thesis makes five contributions: 1) a study of how public appreciation of science and technology are promoted by the use of bias; 2) a study of how public engagement with science and technology are promoted by mediatization processes; 3) a study of how researchers in their popularization activities promote critical understanding of science and technology being modest witnesses; 4) a study of the dialogue models’ room for participation in knowledge and policy construction processes; and 5) in studying the participation model, a better understanding of citizen science and boundary infrastructures.
Finally, the thesis has three more general contributions: 6) it represents the first comprehensive examination of science communication policy in Norway; 7) focusing on technology, it links science communication research and innovation studies; and 8) it contributes to a more analytical approach studying the three science communication models as trading zones within the context of the Nordic model of science communication.
describe science and technology in enthusiastic terms, thereby promoting the deficit
or Public Appreciation of Science and Technology model (PAST). A crucial aspect of
the PAST model is its pro-innovation bias: writers enroll chaperones in the texts, such as
spokespersons, users, celebrities, witnesses, experts, and authorities, to support their claims.
Both “boosterism” and pro-innovation bias constrain the public’s critical understanding of
science and technology. This study includes a detailed exploration of pro-innovation bias in
the popularization of the Internet in the Norwegian press and how journalists use chaperones
to support their claims. The author demonstrates that, in popularizing the Internet, proinnovation
bias manifests several other biases, such as individual-praise, pro-technology,
individual-blame, technology-blame, and source biases.
First, how is public communication of science and technology (PCST) organized in different models of expert–public interaction?
Second, how do different models of science and technology popularization frame science and technology narratives?
Third, building on the first two questions, what are the implications of these models for the social contract between science and society?
This thesis involves both an exploratory cross-case analysis of PCST and a comparative mixed-methods study. The case studies were conducted using a broad array of methods: reviewing policy documents, articles from 3 newspapers over 12–18 years, and the study of participation in experiments and new infrastructures for doing citizen science through documents, observations, and interviews.
This thesis has eight crucial contributions to an improved understanding of public communication of science and technology.
By critically examining the three science communication models, dissemination, dialogue and participation, the thesis makes five contributions: 1) a study of how public appreciation of science and technology are promoted by the use of bias; 2) a study of how public engagement with science and technology are promoted by mediatization processes; 3) a study of how researchers in their popularization activities promote critical understanding of science and technology being modest witnesses; 4) a study of the dialogue models’ room for participation in knowledge and policy construction processes; and 5) in studying the participation model, a better understanding of citizen science and boundary infrastructures.
Finally, the thesis has three more general contributions: 6) it represents the first comprehensive examination of science communication policy in Norway; 7) focusing on technology, it links science communication research and innovation studies; and 8) it contributes to a more analytical approach studying the three science communication models as trading zones within the context of the Nordic model of science communication.
describe science and technology in enthusiastic terms, thereby promoting the deficit
or Public Appreciation of Science and Technology model (PAST). A crucial aspect of
the PAST model is its pro-innovation bias: writers enroll chaperones in the texts, such as
spokespersons, users, celebrities, witnesses, experts, and authorities, to support their claims.
Both “boosterism” and pro-innovation bias constrain the public’s critical understanding of
science and technology. This study includes a detailed exploration of pro-innovation bias in
the popularization of the Internet in the Norwegian press and how journalists use chaperones
to support their claims. The author demonstrates that, in popularizing the Internet, proinnovation
bias manifests several other biases, such as individual-praise, pro-technology,
individual-blame, technology-blame, and source biases.
Grasrotforskning er et samarbeid mellom kunnskapspionerer og grupper av amatører for å fremme forskning, bygge vitenskapelig dannelse, og/eller oppmuntre til demokratisk deltakelse. Sagt litt enklere: Grasrotforskning åpner for at vanlige folk kan være med og bidra i ulike forskningsprosjekter.