Matthew Brockway, August 2001
This dissertation is submitted in part fulfilment of the M.Sc. in Communicating Science, University of Glamorgan
Abstract
Science fiction is currently one of the general public's most popular entertainment genres, appearing in the form of literature, television and film. It is sometimes seen as a science communication tool that can be used to approach the issues of science and technology, both in their own right and in their interactions with society. Many practitioners currently advocate such an application, whilst others believe it to be misplaced. But in the midst of this debate, how do the general public believe that science fiction affects their understanding of science and technology?
A study of literature and expert interviews combined to produce a number of expectations of how science fiction does affect the public's understanding of science and technology, and also of how the general public themselves would perceive it has affected them. The opinions of the general public were then surveyed through the use of a questionnaire carried out in the centre of Cardiff.
The study finds that science fiction does appear to play a part in the public's understanding, but that the public themselves seem either to not realise or deny the effect. Many of the results followed the expert expectations, with a number of strong trends appearing in the data. Now further study is required with a larger sample of the population.
“But I canna change the laws of physics, Captain!”
(as Scotty once said)
1.1: Introducing the issue
1.2: How it came up
1.3: Why is it an important issue
1.4: Aims and Objectives
2.1: Public Interest
2.2: Why is scientific understanding important?
2.3: Crisis in Trust
2.4: A Brief History of Science Fiction
3.1: Intro
3.2: Science Fiction defined?
3.3: Inspiring an interest in science
3.4: Real science?
3.5: Change of location
3.6: Humanity versus science and technology?
3.7: Good/bad
3.8: Image of the scientist
3.9: Predicting the future?
3.10: Science Fiction in education
3.11: SF/Pseudo-science
3.12: Summary
4.1 Aim and Objectives
4.2 Data needed to meet the aim
4.3 Method of data collection
4.3.1 Documentary analysis
4.3.2 Semi-structured “Expert” Interviews
4.3.3 Public questionnaires
4.4 Discussion of relevant methodological issues
4.4.1 Qualitative V’s quantitative
4.4.2 Documentary data
4.4.3 Semi-structured “Expert” Interviews
4.4.4 Questionnaires
4.4.5 Limitations
5.1: Brief introduction to the experts
5.2: Main Opinions
5.2.1: The level of public interest in science and technology
5.2.2: Will Science Fiction be people’s main exposure to S & T
5.2.3: What do you think of as being Science Fiction
5.2.4: Can Science Fiction be used as an educational tool?
5.2.5: On its own can it teach science or inspire?
5.2.6: Should it represent real science, how accurately?
5.2.7: Does Science Fiction predict future science?
5.2.8: Can Science fiction lead or inspire real science?
5.2.9: Negative effects of Science Fiction
5.2.10: Positive effects of Science Fiction
5.2.11: Net effect
5.2.12: Image of the scientist
5.2.13: Belief in Science Fiction affecting the PUS
5.2.14: Public belief in affect on understanding
5.2.15: Popular science books based on Science Fiction
5.2.16: SF/Pseudo-science
5.3: Summary
6.1: Questionnaire
6.2: Result tables
6.3: Analysis of questionnaire results
6.3.1: Age of respondents
6.3.2: Level of interest in science and technology
6.3.3: What is considered to be Science Fiction
6.3.4: Science Fiction fan?
6.3.5: Amount of time spent on Science Fiction
6.3.6: Main exposure to science and technology
6.3.7: Real science
6.3.8: Predicting the future
6.3.9: Image of the scientist
6.3.10: Good/bad depiction
6.3.11: Inspires interest in science and technology?
6.3.12: SF/Pseudo-science
6.3.13: Does Science Fiction affect understanding?
8.1 Summary
8.2 Conclusions
8.3 Further Research
Rebecca
Katie Eagleton
Becky Fox Matthews
Beryl Rosenthal
Paul McCrory
Mark Brake
Julie E Czerneda
Dick Doyle
Prof. Mike Edmunds
Martin Griffiths
Dr Mike Reddy
Brian Stableford