Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||On being a (modern) scientist: Potential risks of engaging the public in the UK interspecies embryo debate|
|Keywords:||Good/ethical scientist;Interspecies embryos;Public engagement|
|Publisher:||Taylor & Francis Group|
|Citation:||New Genetics and Society, 31(4): 408 - 423, (2012)|
|Abstract:||In 2006, a small group of UK academic scientists made headlines when they proposed the creation of interspecies embryos – mixing human and animal genetic material. A public campaign was fought to mobilize support for the research. Drawing on interviews with the key scientists involved, this paper argues that engaging the public through communicating their ideas via the media can result in tensions between the necessity of, and inherent dangers in, scientists campaigning on controversial issues. Some scientists believed that communicating science had damaged their professional standing in the eyes of their peers, who, in turn, policed the boundaries around what they believed constituted a “good” scientist. Tensions between promoting “science” versus promotion of the “scientist”; engaging the public versus publishing peer-reviewed articles and winning grants; and building expectations versus overhyping the science reveal the difficult choices scientists in the modern world have to make over the potential gains and risks of communicating science. We conclude that although scientists' participation in public debates is often encouraged, the rewards of such engagement remain. Moreover, this participation can detrimentally affect scientists' careers.|
|Appears in Collections:||Dept of Social Sciences Media and Communications Research Papers|
Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.