The metaphor of the ocean conveyor belt originated from a scientific understanding of the global thermohaline circulation, particularly the overturning circulation driven by the formation of deep water in the North Atlantic. This image of a continuous, cyclical belt has been instrumental in facilitating hypotheses and interdisciplinary communication within the climate science community. However, Lohmann argues that this metaphor oversimplifies a profoundly complex, three-dimensional ocean system characterized by myriad interacting processes, thereby limiting deeper comprehension. The subtle dynamics of ocean currents, including variations in speed, pathways, and interactions with other physical forces, defy the linear simplicity that the conveyor belt metaphor suggests.

Parallel to this, the “tipping point” metaphor has emerged as another potent conceptual device, resonating both within academia and the broader public discourse. It symbolizes the critical threshold beyond which an Earth system component might undergo abrupt and irreversible change, carrying profound implications for global climate stability. This metaphor encapsulates elements of risk and urgency, rapidly gaining traction in scientific literature, policy circles, and media narratives. Nonetheless, Lohmann emphasizes that its binary framing—depicting a sudden leap from stability to catastrophe—can foster misunderstandings and fatalism, especially among lay audiences lacking foundational climate science knowledge.

Understanding these metaphors requires appreciating their dual nature: they are simultaneously anchored in scientific data and models, yet employed as conceptual simplifications to promote dialogue and comprehension. Lohmann’s analysis suggests that scientific metaphors operate in a triangle of sorts, engaging models, empirical data, and the imaginative leap necessary for public and interdisciplinary engagement. This trade-off often leads to metaphorical depictions that prioritize intuitive grasp over comprehensive accuracy, which can subsequently lead to oversights or misconceptions.

One profound example illustrating the pitfalls of metaphorical communication lies in the public discourse surrounding global temperature increases. The oft-cited 1.5°C rise above pre-industrial levels is heralded as a critical tipping point, predicating irreversible environmental damage and catastrophic global outcomes. While this framing insists on the immediacy of climate action, it risks oversimplifying climate dynamics. In reality, temperature-driven changes unfold over decades and centuries, with gradients and feedbacks complicating any neat categorization of change as “abrupt” or “irreversible.” Consequently, the tipping point metaphor risks eliciting undue fear or complacency by overselling the notion of instantaneous disaster.

Lohmann’s study highlights the need for a recalibrated approach to scientific metaphor use, one that carefully negotiates the tension between precision and public engagement. He advocates for integration of communication research into climate science to better understand how metaphors function psychologically and culturally. This interdisciplinary effort aims to refine metaphors so they convey complexity without overwhelming or alienating diverse audiences. For instance, augmenting metaphorical imagery with clear, contextual explanations may mitigate harmful interpretations and foster constructive dialogue about risks and uncertainties inherent in Earth system science.

The challenges inherent in metaphorical communication mirror broader tensions in science communication: the imperative to distill complex, multifaceted phenomena into accessible narratives while preserving integrity and nuance. In Earth system science—where countless interacting components and feedback loops defy straightforward narratives—this balancing act becomes particularly acute. Lohmann underscores that improving metaphors is not merely a linguistic or educational exercise but a critical step toward supporting sound scientific practices and influencing informed policy decisions.

Moreover, the study touches upon the sociopolitical implications of metaphor use in climate discourse. Metaphors, as carriers of meaning, shape public perception and thereby influence collective responses to climate change. Dramatic metaphors may galvanize action but also risk polarizing audiences or breeding resistance. Conversely, metaphors that lack emotional resonance might fail to generate necessary urgency. Hence, careful crafting of metaphorical language that harnesses emotional engagement without sacrificing factual clarity is paramount.

The metaphor of the ocean conveyor belt and tipping points serves as a case study of the broader role metaphors play in science as cognitive tools. They function as intellectual scaffolds enabling researchers to explore new ideas and forge connections across disciplinary boundaries. Yet, as Lohmann points out, these devices must be continuously evaluated and refined against evolving scientific understanding and communication needs. In doing so, the scientific community can better navigate the intricate interface between abstract knowledge and societal discourse.

Finally, Lohmann’s work calls for ongoing collaboration between scientists, communicators, educators, and policymakers to cultivate metaphorical frameworks that enhance interdisciplinary understanding and public literacy. This concerted effort could diminish the “fog” of misinformation and fear often clouding climate conversations, replacing it with a clearer, more balanced depiction of Earth system realities. Optimal metaphors will strike a synthesizing chord—bridging the gap between complex model-based projections and the intuitive grasp of non-specialists—thus propelling climate science communication forward in an era of urgent environmental challenges.

Subject of Research: Not applicable
Article Title: Models and Metaphors for Interdisciplinarity and Communication in Earth System Science
News Publication Date: 11-Mar-2026
Web References: http://dx.doi.org/10.34133/olar.0140
Image Credits: Gerrit Lohmann (AWI / University of Bremen)
Keywords: Oceanography, Climatology, Climate systems

Marie Neurath’s career spanned several decades, notably from 1944 to 1971, during which she directed a multifaceted team composed of researchers, artists, and writers. This collaborative approach was instrumental in creating over 80 illustrated children’s books that not only conveyed scientific facts but did so through the innovative use of the Isotype (International System of Typographic Picture Education) method. The Isotype technique employed standardized pictograms to visually represent data and facts, effectively bridging linguistic and cultural barriers. This method remains a foundational reference in information design, particularly in educational contexts.

The exhibition curated by Professor Sue Walker of the University of Reading presents an extensive array of original materials from Neurath’s oeuvre, including spreads and unpublished working notes from seminal series such as ‘Wonder World of Nature’ and ‘Wonders of the Modern World.’ Visitors are afforded a rare glimpse into Neurath’s design process, revealing her hands-on involvement and the dynamic interplay between visual elements and textual content. These artifacts underscore the intricate methodology behind the creation of educational infographics meant to stimulate curiosity and facilitate comprehension among children.

Professor Walker, an expert in information design, emphasized the profound impact of Marie Neurath’s interdisciplinary methodology, which integrated scientific accuracy with artistic clarity. Neurath’s insistence on collaboration between scientists, artists, and writers ensured that each book was carefully calibrated to balance visual appeal with factual rigor. This dynamic collaboration forged a new paradigm in educational publishing, where the visual language of science was articulated through an accessible and engaging lexicon of symbols and imagery.

The archival materials showcased at the exhibition are part of the Otto and Marie Neurath Isotype Collection, preserved at the University of Reading. This collection not only provides evidence of the design and production processes behind Neurath’s books but also includes poignant testimonies reflecting their reception. Among these is feedback from a young reader who described the books as “wizard books,” highlighting the enchanting effect these works held over their audience. Such responses underscore the timeless appeal and pedagogical potency of Neurath’s creations.

One of the central achievements of Neurath’s work was the democratization of scientific knowledge, especially in an era when educational resources were often inaccessible to children outside formal schooling contexts. By distilling complex topics into fundamental visual components, her books served as empowering tools that cultivated a foundational scientific literacy. This approach anticipated many contemporary practices in STEM education, where visual aids and data visualization are critical in enhancing comprehension and engagement.

The exhibit also contextualizes Neurath’s work within the broader history of information design, illustrating how her innovations prefigured and influenced modern infographics used in media, education, and public communication. The Isotype system’s principles—clarity, universality, and systematic design—remain highly relevant to today’s designers who seek to communicate multifaceted information efficiently in a visually driven world. The exhibition invites reflection on the enduring legacy of Neurath’s contribution to shaping how knowledge is presented graphically.

Moreover, Neurath’s dedication to inclusive education is palpable in her books’ design philosophy, which strived to transcend linguistic and cultural differences through universally understandable symbols. This commitment reflects an understanding that visual literacy is a key component of scientific literacy, particularly in a globalized society. The exhibition thus situates Neurath not merely as a designer but as a pioneer of educational equity and accessibility.

Professor Walker’s curation captures the essence of Marie Neurath’s interdisciplinary collaboration and pedagogical innovation, evidencing how visual communication strategies can transform abstract scientific ideas into tangible learning experiences for children. The exhibited materials reveal an iterative design process, where feedback loops between content experts and creative professionals resulted in refined educational products. This model of teamwork underscores the value of cross-sector collaboration in educational publishing.

The exhibition at Bologna also highlights the historical significance of Quinto Quarto Edizione’s role in bringing Marie Neurath’s legacy to contemporary audiences, bridging the gap between mid-20th-century design expertise and today’s educational challenges. By reviving interest in Neurath’s work, the exhibition fosters renewed appreciation for visual pedagogy and encourages contemporary educators and designers to draw upon proven methodologies for effective science communication.

Visitors to the exhibit are immersed in a narrative that underscores how the careful integration of design, science, and education can lead to transformative learning experiences. The visual language developed by Neurath provides a template for modern efforts aiming to simplify and clarify scientific content for diverse audiences, reaffirming the power of well-executed infographics as catalysts for knowledge dissemination.

Partners and organizers envision the exhibition as more than a retrospective; it is also a call to action for educators, designers, and communicators to embrace integrative, collaborative approaches in developing educational materials. The legacy of Marie Neurath exemplifies how design innovation rooted in scientific rigor and empathy for learners can achieve profound educational impacts and contribute to broader scientific literacy.

Professor Sue Walker is available to elaborate on these themes through interviews and discussions, contributing expert insights into the ongoing relevance of Marie Neurath’s Isotype books for children and their role in shaping the future of science education through design.

Subject of Research: Science Education, Graphic Design, Information Design for Children

Article Title: Marie Neurath’s Revolutionary Isotype Books: A Visual Language for Science Education Unveiled in Bologna

News Publication Date: April 13, 2024

Web References:
https://mediasvc.eurekalert.org/Api/v1/Multimedia/8dd6455f-2029-45cb-9061-993274bc9617/Rendition/low-res/Content/Public

Image Credits: Professor Sue Walker

Keywords: Marie Neurath, Isotype, Science Education, Information Design, Infographics, Educational Books, Visual Communication, Bologna Book Fair, Graphic Design, Children’s Literature, STEM Education, Otto and Marie Neurath Collection

The research team designed an elaborate experiment involving 872 UK participants, carefully selected to mirror the nation’s demographic distribution by gender, age, and political voting preferences. Their objective was to assess how verbal expression of probabilities—in this case defined by ‘directionality’, which refers to the framing of outcomes in either positively or negatively valenced terms—affects the perceived credibility and urgency of climate impacts. Specifically, the scientists manipulated projections of temperature increases and winter precipitation changes, two critical climate variables with different levels of public familiarity and expectation.

Temperature projections are relatively well understood by the public, representing a familiar point of reference for climate change discussions. In contrast, forecasts about winter precipitation shifts are less commonly interpreted with clarity by the average individual. By introducing these two dimensions—temperature and precipitation—the study taps into the interplay between established knowledge and novel information, creating a robust test bed for exploring how directionality influences cognitive and emotional responses towards climate data.

Critically, the study integrated a second experimental manipulation focused on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission scenarios: low versus high emissions. Low-emission projections typically reflect more optimistic or aggressive mitigation outcomes and are often at odds with the public’s existing beliefs. High-emission scenarios tend to align with current trajectories or pessimistic expectations, serving as a contrasting baseline. This dual manipulation of both linguistic framing and emission intensity provides a rare, multidimensional view of how preconceptions and language intersect to shape climate change communication.

Empirical results reveal clear patterns for temperature projections. When probabilities were framed using positive directionality—for instance, suggesting a ‘small probability’ of increase rather than an ‘unlikely’ chance—participants attributed significantly greater consensus among scientists and judged the underlying scientific evidence as stronger. Correspondingly, their expressed personal concerns about climate change rose measurably. Such findings demonstrate that positive verbal probabilities enhance the perceived credibility and seriousness of temperature rise projections, translating into heightened concern.

Interestingly, the study indicates that the impact of directionality on perception was notably more pronounced under low GHG emission conditions. This suggests that when participants were confronted with projections that contrast strongly with their expectations—such as unexpectedly low temperature increases—the framing effect gains more power. Conversely, for high-emission scenarios where projections accorded more closely with participants’ prior beliefs, the effect of verbal direction was attenuated or even became statistically insignificant. This interaction underscores how cognitive biases and expectation frameworks modulate the reception of scientific information.

For winter precipitation projections, the pattern of results diverged somewhat. Directionality still influenced levels of concern but to a lesser extent and without the same cohesive effects on perceptions of consensus and evidence strength observed for temperature trends. The comparatively smaller and less consistent effects may stem from lower public familiarity with winter rainfall projections, engendering a weaker baseline mental model from which to evaluate probabilistic language. This highlights the crucial role of domain knowledge in mediating the impact of communication strategies.

Underpinning these findings is the broader psychological mechanism of expectancy violation. When climate outcomes are framed in a way that matches or exceeds participants’ anticipations—such as high GHG emissions predicting substantial increases—directionality introduces minimal shifts in belief or attitude. However, framing outcomes that challenge expectations—like low emissions scenarios suggesting modest impacts—in a positive or negative verbal probability framework causes greater shifts in perception. This dynamic reveals the complex interplay between informational content, linguistic tone, and preexisting mental models in shaping public understanding.

The study also sheds light on the subtle but powerful nature of verbal probabilities relative to numeric counterparts. Verbal probabilities, being inherently ambiguous and context-dependent, offer a potent vehicle for framing effects. Words like ‘unlikely’ versus ‘small probability’ carry distinct emotional and cognitive connotations that color how data is internalized. This linguistic nuance is particularly consequential in the climate arena, where scientific uncertainty and probabilistic forecasting are intrinsic but must be communicated without diminishing perceived urgency or trustworthiness.

Importantly, the researchers took care to contextualize their findings within a representative UK sample, addressing political, social, and demographic diversity. This enhances the ecological validity of the results, implying that the observed effects are likely generalizable across broad segments of the public rather than confined to niche groups predisposed to climate skepticism or activism. Thus, the insights offered are crucial for designing communication campaigns that resonate across diverse audiences.

In practical terms, the data gleaned calls for a reconsideration of how climate scientists and communicators articulate future projections. Employing positively valenced verbal probabilities—carefully calibrated according to emission scenarios and public familiarity—may enhance the perceived legitimacy and urgency of climate risks. Conversely, reliance on negative or ambiguous verbiage risks undermining consensus-building and dampening concern, potentially slowing societal momentum towards mitigation and adaptation efforts.

The findings also caution against a one-size-fits-all approach to scientific communication. Because the effects of verbal probability framing hinge on preexisting beliefs and knowledge, tailored messaging strategies are required. For audiences well versed in climate science, subtle linguistic shifts may have marginal influence, whereas for less informed or more skeptical groups, communication framing could represent a decisive factor in shaping attitudes and behaviors.

Another striking aspect of the research is its methodological rigor, combining precise experimental controls with detailed statistical analysis. The authors employed independent t-tests to quantify differences between conditions, while confidence intervals and significance levels delineated the strength and reliability of effects. This statistical robustness lends confidence to the conclusion that verbal directionality exerts a causal influence on climate-related perceptions and concerns.

More broadly, the study contributes to a growing body of evidence recognizing the pivotal role of language and cognition in the public understanding of complex scientific issues. As climate change messaging navigates an increasingly polarized information landscape, fine-tuning the verbal coding of probability and uncertainty emerges as a vital lever in influencing societal readiness and policy support. This research lays foundational groundwork by empirically demonstrating that subtle verbal nuances can have outsized impacts on collective climate consciousness.

In summary, this pioneering experiment reveals that negative verbal probabilities systematically weaken the communication of climate science by diminishing perceived consensus and evidence strength, as well as personal concern, especially when projections contradict prior beliefs. By contrast, positive directionality in verbal probabilities bolsters these perceptions, particularly under low emission scenarios and for well-understood variables like temperature change. These insights inform the design of clearer, more persuasive climate communication strategies that can better mobilize public engagement and action.

As governments and organizations worldwide strive to convey the urgency and nuance of climate projections, this research underscores the importance of linguistic precision and psychological insight. Harnessing the power of positive verbal framing aligned with audience expectations could accelerate the translation of scientific understanding into meaningful societal response, bridging the gap between climate knowledge and climate action.

—
Subject of Research: Impact of verbal probability framing on public perceptions of climate change science and risk.

Article Title: Negative verbal probabilities undermine communication of climate science.

Article References:
Juanchich, M., Teigen, K.H., Shepherd, T.G. et al. Negative verbal probabilities undermine communication of climate science. Nat. Clim. Chang. (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-025-02472-1

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-025-02472-1

Image Credits: AI Generated

This joint symposium is designed to draw together a diverse cadre of stakeholders including researchers, practitioners, educators, and policymakers, predominantly from Asia but also globally. The focus will be on enhancing science communication strategies specifically tailored to non-Western contexts. This geographic and cultural lens is critical, given that the majority of existing science communication frameworks originate from Western scientific paradigms, which often fail to account for unique cultural nuances and educational traditions present in Asia.

At the heart of the symposium are two pivotal inquiries intended to propel the field forward. The first question asks how Asia can establish formal and informal education and training programs that serve to professionalize science communication. The second probes the methodological divide between science communication research and practical application, emphasizing bridging this gap to more effectively engage diverse audiences. These questions shape a forward-thinking agenda, underscored by interactive formats which prioritize co-development of novel ideas and actionable recommendations.

The structure of the symposium is meticulously crafted to promote dynamic exchange and collaborative learning. Keynote speeches will establish foundational insights, while contributed talks will provide a platform for emerging and established voices. Notably, interactive working group sessions are designed to foster practical engagement, moving beyond theoretical discussion to include tangible skill development and strategic planning, which are crucial in science communication ecosystems.

The two keynote speakers epitomize the symposium’s thematic breadth and depth. Professor Sujatha Raman, renowned for her role as UNESCO Chair in Science Communication for the Public Good at the Australian National University, will address the concept of ‘culturing’ science communication. Her perspective encourages understanding science communication not just as a dissemination of facts, but as a cultural and societal enterprise that shapes and redefines public engagement with science. Meanwhile, Dr. Asako Okamura from Japan’s National Institute of Science and Technology Policy (NISTEP) will provide insights on foresight and future trajectories of science communication, integrating policy perspectives and emerging global trends.

In addition to the core symposium program, post-event activities on November 13 will include the EurekAlert! Japan User Meeting, an important occasion for press officers and science communicators to exchange experiences with science media mobilization. Complementing this will be an array of skills-based workshops addressing contemporary challenges such as responsible uses of artificial intelligence in communication, strategies for institutional branding within science outreach, methods to prevent overhype in science storytelling, and innovative techniques for utilizing generative AI technologies in public engagement efforts.

Hosting the PCST Japan 2025 symbolizes more than just a conference; it reflects a strategic commitment to fostering dialogue between the scientific community and broader society. ELSI’s leadership, particularly through symposium co-chair Thilina Heenatigala, emphasizes the aspiration to amplify Asian voices in the worldwide science communication discourse. This is a critical evolution, providing perspectives from diverse sociocultural backgrounds that enrich global knowledge exchange while promoting inclusivity.

ELSI itself represents a pioneering force in interdisciplinary research, anchored by its ambition to unravel fundamental scientific questions concerning the Earth and life’s co-evolution. As a World Premiere International research center supported by Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), it orchestrates cutting-edge research that intersects earth sciences, life sciences, and beyond. The PCST Japan Symposium integration aligns perfectly with ELSI’s mission to transcend disciplinary boundaries and societal divides.

The Institute of Science Tokyo (Science Tokyo), inaugurated in 2024 through a strategic merger of Tokyo Medical and Dental University and Tokyo Institute of Technology, serves as host institution for this symposium. The Institute’s overarching mission to “advance science and human wellbeing to create value for and with society” aligns seamlessly with the symposium’s dedication to cultivating more effective science communication infrastructures, focusing on societal impact rather than isolated academic inquiry.

Japan’s World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI) has played a vital role since 2007 in fostering research hubs that adhere to the highest global standards. By promoting autonomy in management and research practices, WPI centers such as ELSI have catalyzed innovative approaches in both basic and applied science. This autonomy is instrumental in allowing creative educational and policy experiments within science communication to flourish within such centers.

The Japan SciCom Forum (JSF), as a vital community for science communicators within Japan, anchors the symposium’s national significance. JSF’s efforts to boost English-language science communication and its regular networking events, including annual conferences and online socials, reflect a robust ecosystem dedicated to capacity building and sharing best practices. With over 300 active members and historical attendance exceeding 500 participants at its conferences, JSF provides a dynamic foundation for the success of the upcoming symposium.

The outputs of PCST Japan 2025 are designed to extend beyond the event itself. By collaboratively producing two strategic papers focused on the symposium’s guiding questions, the event aims to generate practical policy recommendations and refined professional practices. Such documents are anticipated to serve as seminal references for stakeholders across Asia, promoting sustained improvements in science communication frameworks tailored to the region’s specific needs.

In sum, the PCST Japan Symposium 2025 represents a watershed moment for science communication in Asia and globally. It envisions a future where the region not only adapts international models of communication but also contributes original thinking and context-sensitive practices to the global stage. Through rigorous academic exchange, practical workshops, and policy-oriented outcomes, this symposium promises to catalyze enduring progress in how science is communicated, understood, and valued worldwide.

Subject of Research: Science communication development in non-Western contexts, professionalisation of science communication in Asia, bridging science communication research and practice

Article Title: Earth-Life Science Institute to Host Landmark PCST Japan Symposium 2025: Advancing Science Communication Across Asia

News Publication Date: Not specified

Web References: Not specified

References: Not specified

Image Credits: Credit: JSF

Keywords: Social sciences, Computational social science, Education

This study delves deeply into the critical, yet often overlooked role of science journalists who serve as intermediaries between the scientific community and the public. Unlike earlier research primarily focused on public opinion metrics, this observational study employs means such as focus groups and expert interviews with 87 information professionals—including science journalists, institutional communicators, and researchers—to capture nuanced perceptions of trust and media dynamics. Such a methodological approach offers fresh insight into how journalistic practices, media ecosystems, and sociopolitical contexts intersect to shape the public’s relationship with science.

The country-specific media ecosystems analyzed demonstrate striking differences. Germany exhibits a relatively robust institutional infrastructure, with dedicated science desks found across major public broadcasters and reputed media houses. This institutional stability also promotes stronger professional networks and fact-checking regimes, which contribute to mitigating the sensationalism often associated with tabloid-style reporting. Conversely, Italy’s landscape suffers from fragmentation: limited stable employment for science journalists, a proliferation of freelancers, and a general undervaluation of specialized science reporting. A participant from Italy poignantly described science journalism as a luxury item, grabbing attention primarily during crises but otherwise marginalized in the media diet. Lithuania’s small market size and post-communist historical legacies further complicate the picture, where specialist science reporters are scarce, and science coverage typically falls to generalist journalists or academic collaborators.

A salient theme emerging from the discussions is the profound impact of growing ideological polarization on the public’s reception of scientific information. Journalists across all three countries highlighted how audience members no longer process scientific facts through an objective lens but instead filter the information through political identities and emotional affiliations. This phenomenon complicates the task of science communicators, who must now operate within a fragmented societal fabric where factual correctness alone does not guarantee credibility or acceptance.

The study also sheds light on the evolving journalistic workflow shaped by the rapid cadence of online news consumption. Participants criticize what they refer to as a reactive journalism paradigm, characterized by short-term, contingency-driven coverage that prioritizes sensational topics with high click potential, such as pandemic crises, at the expense of providing sustained, well-contextualized reporting on enduring scientific challenges. This digital-first editorial logic, in which online audience metrics dictate print agenda-setting, creates feedback loops that marginalize less-clickworthy but scientifically vital topics like climate change, contributing to a decline in public familiarity and, potentially, trust.

Importantly, the research underscores that the commodification of digital attention has unintended consequences beyond mere topic selection. When key scientific issues become overshadowed by misinformation and “alternative” narratives that exploit audience fatigue and ideological biases, pseudoscience gains fertile ground to spread. Journalists expressed concerns regarding the erosion of shared epistemic frameworks, warning that limited long-form investigative reporting allows misinformation to fill informational voids, undermining evidence-based understandings.

Against this backdrop, the role of systemic support structures emerged as a central factor influencing science journalism’s ability to foster trust. Rather than attributing trust-building solely to individual reporter skill or isolated story quality, participants emphasized the necessity for broader institutional frameworks. These include sustainable funding mechanisms, such as those underpinning public-service media, dedicated science desks, fact-checking units, investigative funds, and robust professional networks that bolster journalistic capacity and independence. Germany’s relatively more developed support ecosystem was cited as enabling more resilient journalistic practice that can withstand market pressures and short-term digital trends.

Another transformative insight from the study pertains to the evolving self-conception of journalists as active “trust brokers”—a role that transcends traditional notions of objective information conveyance. Journalists increasingly perceive their mission as mediators who cultivate dialogue, facilitate public engagement, and foster trust not through mere transmission of facts, but via relational and co-creative processes. This reframing signals an implicit shift towards participatory science communication, where journalists embrace transparency, humility, and audience interaction to reinforce the social contract underlying their profession.

To enact this vision, the respondents advocate for news formats that blend interactivity and collaboration. They cited emerging experimental models such as podcasts with live Q&A, digital communities for collective sensemaking, and platform-adapted content that retains scientific integrity while meeting audiences where they already are. While acknowledging these approaches are no panacea, journalists agree that moving beyond one-way dissemination towards dialogic engagement is essential for sustaining warranted trust in science in digitally mediated societies.

This comprehensive study thus reframes the conversation on public trust in science by centering the voices and experiences of science communicators themselves, revealing a richly textured interplay of media structures, societal contexts, and journalistic innovation. In doing so, it challenges simplistic narratives about a uniform breakdown of trust and instead presents trust as an emergent, negotiated condition contingent on intricate socio-political and technological factors. The research calls for policy and institutional responses that recognize trust as a systemic attribute necessitating long-term investment in robust communication ecosystems.

As we face accelerating scientific and environmental challenges globally, these findings provide crucial insights for stakeholders seeking to bolster the public’s engagement with science. They highlight the necessity of supporting infrastructures that empower journalists as facilitators of mediated trust, while encouraging new media forms that foster mutual understanding and co-creation between scientists, journalists, and diverse publics. Ultimately, sustaining science’s social legitimacy requires embracing complexity, resisting reductive narratives, and fostering resilient communication pathways attuned to the evolving digital age.

Subject of Research: Science communication, public trust in science, role of science journalists, media ecosystems in Germany, Italy, and Lithuania

Article Title: Science journalists and public trust: comparative insights from Germany, Italy, and Lithuania

News Publication Date: 22-Sep-2025

Image Credits: ITAS

Keywords: Science journalism, Science advocacy, Science communication, Communications, Mass media, Written communication, Social studies of science

Taking the distinguished top honor is Professor Bruce Lewenstein of Cornell University, whose extensive career epitomizes dedicated scholarship and leadership in the realm of science communication research and education. His interdisciplinary approach intricately weaves research, pedagogy, and community-building, underscoring the vital role public communication plays in shaping societal understanding of science and technology. Lewenstein’s decades-long efforts have not only expanded academic boundaries but have also laid foundational infrastructure for the professionalization of science communication on a global scale.

In parallel, the award recognized two remarkable runners-up: Professor Susana Herrera-Lima from Mexico and Professor Toss Gascoigne from Australia. Both exemplify visionary leadership in advancing the science communication landscape in their respective regions and beyond, emphasizing the creation of institutional frameworks, training programs, and international collaborations that propel the discipline forward. Their endeavors underscore the critical role of regional initiatives melding into a cohesive global movement for science communication excellence.

The PCST Award itself is generously funded by the GIST Graduate School of AI Policy and Strategy, a South Korean institution at the forefront of interdisciplinary education where artificial intelligence intersects with societal governance. This sponsorship underlines the award’s commitment to supporting emergent fields that shape public understanding and policy of rapidly evolving scientific domains. The monetary recognition – $1,500 for the winner and $700 for each runner-up – serves both as an incentive and acknowledgment of sustained contributions to science communication’s professionalization.

Professor Lewenstein’s career trajectory offers an emblematic case study of the field’s evolution. Since 1987, his pedagogical and research initiatives at Cornell University have fostered the integration of communication theory, science policy, and social studies of science, collectively enhancing the epistemic foundations of science communication. His work navigates the complexities of disseminating scientific knowledge amidst growing public skepticism and institutional distrust, particularly relevant in an era marked by rampant misinformation and epistemic polarization.

Beyond his academic achievements, Lewenstein’s involvement in founding the PCST Network itself demonstrates his commitment to creating lasting professional networks that bridge geographical and disciplinary boundaries. These networks foster shared standards, ethical frameworks, and collaborative ventures that elevate the visibility, credibility, and impact of science communication practitioners globally. His recognition signals the importance of infrastructure-building as a pillar of professional growth alongside traditional research outputs.

Professor Susana Herrera-Lima’s contributions illuminate the particular challenges and opportunities endemic to Latin America’s science communication milieu. Her leadership in establishing Mexico’s pioneering Master’s degree in Science and Culture Communication at ITESO signifies a landmark institutional commitment to scrutinize and nurture the discipline within culturally and socio-politically diverse contexts. Her efforts extend pedagogically and organizationally through diploma programs and mentorship that cultivate a new generation of communicators equipped to engage with complex societal issues.

Herrera-Lima’s influence also permeates collaborative scientific communication platforms such as SOMEDICyT, RedPOP, and PCST, where her advocacy stresses regional synergies and international discourse integration. Notably, her foundational role in the editorial board of the Journal of Science Communication (JCOM) Latin America and the sustained success of Café Scientifique ITESO establish vital venues for scholarly exchange, public dialogue, and community engagement across Latin America.

Professor Toss Gascoigne’s international contributions are exemplified through his pivotal role in the creation of “Communicating Science: A Global Perspective,” a seminal text mapping the trajectory of science communication worldwide. This work distills seven years of meticulously gathered data and narratives across 39 countries, contributed by over a hundred authors, thus offering unprecedented empirical and theoretical coherence to the field’s global evolution. Its widespread download count attests to its resonance and practical value across academia and practice.

Gascoigne’s tenure as the inaugural President of PCST was marked by transformational leadership that democratized the network’s governance and amplified its global reach. His vision ensured that science communication transcended Western epistemological frameworks, embracing diverse cultural and institutional contexts. The award thus reflects not only individual achievement but also collective authorship and community-building that are intrinsic to science communication’s vitality.

Beyond these recipients, the 2025 shortlist highlights six additional outstanding figures, including Liliann Fischer and Susanne Hecker from Germany and Brooke Smith from the USA. These nominees underscore the expanding horizons of science communication scholarship and practice, each forging pathways to enhance visibility, methodological rigor, and societal relevance of the discipline in diverse contexts.

The PCST Award, established in 2024, strategically embraces a broad spectrum of contributions, ranging from policy influence and academic program development to network creation and research excellence. Its holistic criteria reflect an awareness that the science communication profession requires multifaceted development, including professional identity-building, infrastructural coherence, and public engagement efficacy. Emphasizing architects over mere spokespeople, the award recognizes those constructing the edifice upon which the future of science communication rests.

In the words of Dr. Alexandra Borissova Saleh, PCST Treasurer and Award Executive Secretary, the prize aims to highlight the often-unseen foundational work that sustains the field. The organized scientific committee overseeing the award process ensures rigorous peer evaluation and exemplifies the network’s commitment to transparency and high standards. The forthcoming award cycle, slated for announcement at the 2027 PCST Conference in Shanghai, invites a diverse pool of nominees, fostering inclusivity and continuing the momentum towards elevating the professional culture of science communication.

Finally, the support from the GIST Graduate School of AI Policy and Strategy resonates with the award’s forward-looking orientation. By aligning science communication with AI policy and governance education, the sponsorship reflects the interconnectedness of scientific domains and the increasing imperative for cross-disciplinary fluency in addressing global challenges. The PCST Award thus stands as a beacon welcoming and encouraging innovation, collaboration, and leadership in science communication worldwide.

Subject of Research: Contributions to the professional development and advancement of the field of science communication.

Article Title: Not specified in the original content.

News Publication Date: Not explicitly stated; inferred May 2025 (post-PCST 2025 Conference).

Web References: None provided.

References: None provided.

Image Credits: PCST Network

Keywords: Science communication, scientific community, PCST Award, professional development, science communication networks, global science communication.

Stokes’ work transcends academia, as she regularly contributes articles to major publications like The New York Times, The Atlantic, and The Washington Post. These articles are designed not merely to inform but to inspire readers to engage with climate-related issues. She also co-hosts the acclaimed podcast “A Matter of Degrees,” alongside climate activist Katharine Wilkinson. Through this platform, they examine the multifaceted drivers of climate change while exploring actionable solutions to one of the most critical issues facing humanity. Their discussions encourage a wide audience to grasp the urgency of climate action and advocate for effective policies.

In recognition of her distinctive contributions to climate science communication, Leah Stokes has been awarded the prestigious 2024 Schneider Award for Outstanding Climate Science Communication from ClimateOne. This honor, named after the late climate scientist Stephen H. Schneider, acknowledges individuals who have made significant scientific contributions while effectively articulating complex concepts to broader audiences. Stokes expressed her gratitude for being associated with past awardees, including renowned climate communicators like Katherine Hayhoe and Naomi Oreskes. For her, the recognition serves as a reminder of her responsibility to simplify complicated climate issues so they can be better understood by the general public, thereby encouraging meaningful action.

As a leading voice in environmental politics, Leah Stokes holds the title of Anton Vonk Associate Professor in the UCSB Department of Political Science. She emphasizes that understanding climate issues is crucial for public engagement and advocacy. In her words, “When people understand an issue, they’re more likely to take action.” This philosophy rings particularly true in the context of an increasingly urgent climate crisis, where the involvement of the public is vital to creating sustainable solutions. Her passion for effective communication is matched only by her commitment to scientific integrity, blending an academic perspective with a sense of urgency.

One of Stokes’ notable initiatives at UCSB is the 2035 Initiative, an interdisciplinary collaboration aimed at addressing climate policy by incorporating insights from various fields. The mission is daring yet clear: to develop actionable roadmaps for reducing climate pollution and enhancing community resilience within the next ten years. This project highlights her belief in the necessity of collective action to tackle climate challenges. It emphasizes the importance of scholarly collaboration in formulating practical and enforceable policies that can lead to meaningful change in the immediate future.

Stokes’ approach is guided by her philosophy of community engagement over solitary effort. She argues that focusing excessively on personal environmental footprints can obscure the more significant impact of collective action. This perspective is grounded in the belief that real transformation occurs when individuals and communities unite to leverage their combined strength. “It’s not about doing everything perfectly on your own — it’s about joining forces and building the future that we want to see,” she asserts. This understanding of collective responsibility is essential, especially as society grapples with existential threats posed by climate changes.

In her role as a policy expert and climate activist, Leah Stokes embraces the complexities of her responsibilities, especially as a mother who must advocate for the future of her children. She is currently penning a memoir entitled “The Carbon Wave,” a narrative that blends personal experiences with her journey to promote historic climate legislation. This book seeks to document not just her individual experiences but also those of fellow policy advocates, especially parents who are striving for a sustainable and equitable future. By weaving personal stories with policy discussions, Stokes aims to deliver a compelling message about the power of individual and community action in effecting change.

Reflecting on her career and mission, Stokes acknowledges the importance of hope in addressing climate challenges. She recognizes that discouragement can often impede progress in climate advocacy, which is why she endeavors to communicate a vision of courageous action and resilient communities. Her upcoming book aims to inspire readers to envision the possibilities of collective efforts in combating climate change. Stories of resilience and activism serve as vital counter-narratives to despair, illustrating that positive changes are possible and actionable.

In addition to her academic and advocacy work, Leah Stokes is also recognized for her ability to galvanize younger generations, encouraging them to take climate action seriously. By fostering dialogue and engagement among varied demographics, she creates a sense of shared ownership over climate solutions. She believes that future leaders must be equipped with the knowledge and tools to navigate the complexities of climate politics effectively. This empowers rising activists and policymakers to contribute to the evolving discourse on climate action, ensuring their voices are heard in discussions about sustainability and equity.

Leah Stokes’ dedication extends beyond her immediate professional responsibilities, reflecting a broader commitment to ensure that future generations inherit a world worth living in. By fostering interdisciplinary dialogue and community engagement, she enhances the likelihood of achieving sustainable progress. Her role as an educator, communicator, and advocate for the climate represents a multifaceted approach to tackling one of the greatest challenges of our time. As society stands at a crossroads, individuals like Stokes are crucial in both informing and inspiring collective action toward a sustainable future.

As she navigates the complexities of climate advocacy and policy formation, Leah Stokes remains a guiding force in promoting a clear understanding of environmental issues. Her work emphasizes that while the challenges may seem daunting, victory lies in unity and shared responsibility. The pathway to a sustainable future doesn’t solely lie within individual actions; it resides within collective efforts that harness our combined power to effect significant change. As such, Stokes’ voice, ideas, and initiatives will undoubtedly shape the next stages of climate discourse and activism, illuminating the potential for a healthier planet.

The essence of Leah Stokes’ mission is about not merely understanding climate science but translating that knowledge into actionable steps that individual citizens, communities, and policymakers can take. It highlights the importance of messaging, education, and collaboration in forging alliances needed to enact effective climate policy. The urgency of the climate crisis demands not just aware citizens but equipped ones who understand the levers of change available to them. Therefore, as Stokes continues her work in academia and activism, her insights will be vital in navigating the ever-evolving landscape of climate action, leading society toward a brighter, more sustainable future.

Subject of Research: Climate Science Communication and Environmental Policy
Article Title: Leah Stokes: Bridging Science and Engagement in Climate Policy
News Publication Date: October 2023
Web References: Not applicable
References: Not applicable
Image Credits: Matt Perko
Keywords: Climate Change, Environmental Politics, Renewable Energy, Climate Advocacy, Academic Research, Schneider Award, Community Engagement, Sustainability, Public Policy, Climate Communication, Policy Innovation, Interdisciplinary Collaboration