Mediatization of science

reconfigurations of the paradigm of scientific communication and academic labour in digital era

Keywords: Scholarly Communication, Mediatization, Sociability

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the mediatization of academic work and the reconfiguration of the paradigm of scientific communication in the digital age, based on five central spheres that organize the social dynamics of science. Since this discussion that has recently gained attention, an exploratory study model based on qualitative research was adopted, using interviews with 25 Brazilian researchers who use different social networks as a way of disseminating and sharing their work. This discussion intends to show the transformation of current scientific communication, seeking to understand how different areas of knowledge understand this change in the communication paradigm by the mediatization of science.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Thaiane Moreira de Oliveira, Universidade Federal Fluminense.

Coordenadora do Fórum de Periódicos e Comunicação Científica (Foco/UFF)

Pró-reitoria de Pesquisa, Pós-graduação e Inovação (Proppi/UFF) Professora do Programa de Pós-graduação em Comunicação (PPGCOM/UFF) Coordenadora do Laboratório de Investigação em Ciência, Inovação, Tecnologia e Educação (Cite-Lab) Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF)

References

ALBAGLI, S. Divulgação científica: informação científica para cidadania. Ciência da Informação, Brasília, DF, v. 25, n. 3, p. 396-404, 1996.

ALLMER, T. Academic labour, digital media and capitalism. Critical Sociology, Thousand Oaks, v. 16, n. 1, p. 44-48, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920517735669

ALLMER, T. Theorising and analysing academic labour. tripleC, London, v. 16, n. 1, p. 49-77, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v16i1.868

BARATA, G.; CALDAS, G.; GASCOIGNE, T. Brazilian science communication research: national and international contributions. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, Rio de Janeiro, v. 90, n. 2, supl. 1, p. 2523-2542, ago. 2018. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201720160822

BARATA, R. B.; GOLDBAUM, M. Perfil dos pesquisadores com bolsa de produtividade em pesquisa do CNPq da área de saúde coletiva. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, Rio de Janeiro, v. 19, n. 6, p. 1863-1876, 2003.

BARDIN, L. Análise de conteúdo. Lisboa: Edições 70, 2006.

BEER, D. The social power of algorithms. Journal Information, Communication & Society, Abingdon, v. 20, n. 1, p. 1-13, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1216147

BOURDIEU, P. O campo científico. In: ORTIZ, R. (Org.). Pierre Bourdieu: sociologia. São Paulo: Ática, 1983. p. 156-183.

BUENO, W. C. Comunicação cientifica e divulgação científica: aproximações e rupturas conceituais. Informação & Informação, Londrina, v. 15, n. 1, p. 1-12, dez. 2010. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5433/1981-8920.2010v15n1espp1

CURASI, C. F. A critical exploration of face-to-face interviewing vs. computer-mediated interviewing. International Journal of Market Research, Thousand Oaks, v. 43, n. 4, 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530104300402

DENZIN, N. K.; LINCOLN, Y. S. Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1994.

DETERDING, S. et al. Gamification: using game-design elements in non-gaming contexts. In: CHI CONFERENCE ON HUMAN FACTORS IN COMPUTING SYSTEMS, 11., 2011, Vancouver. Proceedings… New York: Association for Computing Machinery, 2011. p. 2425-2428.

FREIRE, P. Pedagogía del oprimido. Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI, 2005.

FUCHS, C. Social media: a critical introduction. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2017.

FUCHS, C.; SEVIGNANI, S. What is digital labour? What is digital work? What’s their difference? And why do these questions matter for understanding social media? tripleC, London, v. 11, n. 2, p. 237-293, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v11i2.461

GIBSON, E. J. The concept of affordances in development: the renascence of functionalism. In: COLLINS, W. A. (Org.). The concept of development: the Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Hillsdale, Mahwah, 1982. p. 55-81.

GIBSON, E. J. Where is the information for affordances? Ecological Psychology, v. 12, n. 1, p. 53-56, 2000.

GUARESCHI, P. A. Mídia e democracia: o quarto versus o quinto poder. Debates, Porto Alegre, v. 1, n. 1, p. 6, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22456/1982-5269.2505

HAMMARFELT, B. M. S. et al. Quantified academic selves: the gamification of science through social networking services. Information Research, Borås, v. 21, n. 2, 2016. Disponível em: <https://bit.ly/2D803VF>. Acesso em: 4 out. 2018.

HJARVARD, S. Midiatização: teorizando a mídia como agente de mudança social e cultural. Matrizes, São Paulo, v. 5, n. 2, p. 53-91, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1982-8160.v5i2p53-91

HUNT, N.; MCHALE, S. A practical guide to the e-mail interview. Qualitative Health Research, Thousand Oaks, v. 17, n. 10, p. 1415-1421, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732307308761

KIM, S.-T.; LEE, Y.-H. New functions of Internet mediated agenda-setting: agenda-rippling and reversed agenda-setting. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, Seul, v. 50, n. 3, p. 175-205, 2006.

KRIEGER, L. The intellectuals and European society. Political Science Quarterly, Nova York, v. 67, n. 2, p. 225-247, 1952.

KROTZ, F. The meta-process of mediatization as a conceptual frame. Global Media and Communication, Thousand Oaks, v. 3, n. 3, p. 256-260, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17427665070030030103

LATOUR, B. Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

LETA, J. As mulheres na ciência brasileira: crescimento, contrastes e um perfil de sucesso. Estudos Avançados, São Paulo, v. 17, n. 49, p. 271-284, 2003. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-40142003000300016

LÉVY-LEBLOND, J.-M. Elementary quantum models with position-dependent mass. European Journal of Physics, Bristol, v. 13, n. 5, p. 215, 1992.

LEWENSTEIN, B. V. Models of public communication of science and technology. Public Understanding of Science, Thousand Oaks, v. 16, p. 1-11, 2003.

LOCKWOOD, G. Academic clickbait: articles with positively-framed titles, interesting phrasing, and no wordplay get more attention online. The Winnower, New York, v. 3, 2016. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15200/winn.146723.36330

MARCEL. G. Entretiens: Paul Ricoeur, Gabriel Marcel. Paris: Présence de Gabriel Marcel, 1998.

MARCINKOWSKI, F.; KOHRING, M. The changing rationale of science communication: a challenge to scientific autonomy. Journal of Science Communication, Trieste, v. 13, n. 3, p. 1-8, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22323/2.13030304

MARTINO, L. M. S. Três hipóteses sobre as relações entre mídia, entretenimento e política. Revista Brasileira de Ciência Política, Brasília, DF, n. 6, p. 137-150, 2011. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-33522011000200006

MEHO, L. I. E‐mail interviewing in qualitative research: a methodological discussion. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Hoboken, v. 57, n. 10, p. 1284-1295, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20416

MERTON, R. K. The sociology of science: theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973.

MEYER, T. Media democracy. London: Polity, 2002.

MILES, M. B.; HUBERMAN, A. M.; SALDANA, J. Qualitative data analysis. London: Sage, 2013.

MOED, H. F. Alternative approaches to the quantitative assessment of academic research. El Profesional de la Información, v. 27, n. 2, p. 237-239, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.mar.02

MURRAY, C. D., SIXSMITH, J. E-mail: a qualitative research medium for interviewing? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Abingdon, v. 1, n. 2, 103-121, 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.1998.10846867

MYERS, G. Discourse studies of scientific popularization: questioning the boundaries. Discourse Studies, Thousand Oaks, v. 5, n. 2, p. 265-279, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445603005002006

OLIVEIRA, T.; EVANGELISTA, S.; TOTH, J. A ciência no Youtube: redes de autoridade e diferente linguagens da comunicação científica na era digital. In: CONGRESSO TELEVISÕES, 1., 2007, Niterói. Anais… Niterói: Universidade Federal Fluminense, 2017.

OLIVERO, N.; LUNT, P. Privacy versus willingness to disclose in e-commerce exchanges: the effect of risk awareness on the relative role of trust and control. Journal of Economic Psychology, Amsterdam, v. 25, n. 2, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00172-1

PORITZ, J. A.; REES, J. Education is not an app: the future of university teaching in the internet age. London: Routledge, 2017.

PRIEM, J. et al. Altmetrics: a manifesto. Out. 2010. Disponível em: <http://altmetrics.org/manifesto>. Acesso em: 7 nov. 2018.

RECUERO, R. Redes sociais na internet. Porto Alegre: Sulina, 2011.

SANTOS, N. C. F.; CANDIDO, L. F. de O.; KUPPENS, C. L. Produtividade em pesquisa do CNPq: análise do perfil dos pesquisadores da química. Quimica Nova, São Paulo, v. 33, n. 2, p. 489-95, 2010. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-40422010000200044

SANTOS, R. de J. L dos. Modelos de engajamento. Estudos Avançados, São Paulo, v. 19, n. 54, p. 391-427, 2005. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-40142005000200021

SARTRE, J. P. L’existentialisme est un humanisme. Paris: Gallimard, 1996.

SCHERER, A. S.; MOTTA-ROTH, D. Engajamento e redução do espaço dialógico no gênero notícia de popularização científica. Letras, Santa Maria, n. 50, p. 261-302, 2015. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5902/2176148520213

SCIENCE METRIX. Analytical support for bibliometrics indicators: open access availability of scientific publications. Montreal: Science-Metrix, 2018. Disponível em: <https://bit.ly/2nTbece>.

SIBILIA, P. Os diários íntimos na internet e a crise da interioridade psicológica. In: ENCONTRO DA COMPÓS, 12., 2003, Recife. Anais... Recife: Compós/Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, 2003.

VAN ZOONEN, L. I-Pistemology: changing truth claims in popular and political culture. European Journal of Communication, v. 27, n. 1, p. 56-67, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323112438808

VERÓN, E. Teoria da midiatização: uma perspectiva semioantropológica e algumas de suas consequências. Matrizes, São Paulo, v. 8, n. 1, 2014. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11606/issn.1982-8160.v8i1p13-19

WEAVER, D.; MCCOMBS, M.; SHAW, D. L. Agenda-setting research: issues, attributes, and influences. In: KAID, L. L. Handbook of political communication research. New York: Routledge, 2004.

WEINGART, P. Science and the media. Research Policy, Amsterdam, v. 27, n. 8, p. 869-879, 1998. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00096-1

WINN, J. Writing about academic labour. Workplace, Vancouver, n. 25, p. 1-15, 2015.

Published
2018-12-26
How to Cite
Oliveira, T. (2018). Mediatization of science. MATRIZes, 12(3), 101-126. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1982-8160.v12i3p101-126
Section
Dossier