2001 “Science Communication with the Public: A Cross-Cultural Event.” In Science Communication in Theory and Practice, ed. by Stocklmayer, Susan M., Michael M. Gore and Chris Bryant, 23–45. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bednarek, Monika, and Helen Caple
2017The Discourse of News Values. How News Organizations Create Newsworthiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2020 “Image repair theory.” In Crisis Communication, ed. by Finn Frandsen, and Winni Johansen, 105–119. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Brüggemann, Michael, Ines Lörcher, and Stefanie Walter
2020 “Post-normal Science Communication. Exploring the Blurring Boundaries of Science and Journalism.” Journal of Science Communication 19 (3): 1–22.
Bucchi, Massimiano and Brian Trench
(eds)2014Routledge Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology. Routledge: Milton Park.
Bucher, Hans-Jürgen
2019 “The contribution of media studies to the understanding of science communication.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal and Thomas Gloning, 51–76. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Burns, Terry, John O’Connor, and Susan Stocklmayer
2003 “Science Communication: A Contemporary Definition.” Public Understanding of Science 12 (2): 183–202.
Callon, Michel
1999 “The role of lay people in the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge.” Science Technology & Society 4 (1): 81–94.
Cohen, Stanley
2002Folk Devils and Moral Panics. London, New York: Routledge.
Coombs, W. Timothy
2020 “Situational crisis communication theory: Influences, provenance, evolution, and prospects.” In Crisis Communication, ed. by Finn Frandsen and Winni Johansen, 121–140. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Dontcheva-Navratilova, Olga, Martin Adam, Renata Povolná, and Radek Vogel
2020Persuasion in specialised discourses. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
d’Andrea, Luciano, and Andrea Declich
2005 “The sociological nature of science communication.” Journal of Science Communication 4 (2): 1–9.
Dunwoody, Sharon
2019 “Science journalism.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal and Thomas Gloning, 417–438. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Felt, Ulrike and Sarah R. Davies
2020Exploring Science Communication: A Science and Technology Studies Approach. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Fischoff, Baruch
2019 “Evaluating science communication.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116 (16): 7670–7675.
Frandsen, F., and Winni Johansen
2017Organizational Crisis Communication: A Multivocal Approach. London: Sage.
Franzen, Martina
2019 “Reconfigurations of science communication research in the digital age.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal and Thomas Gloning, 603–624. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Gascoigne, Toss, Donghong Cheng, Michel Claessens, Jenni Metcalfe, Bernard Schiele, and Shunke Shi
2010 “Is science communication its own field?” Journal of Science Communication 9 (3): 1–19.
Gloning, Thomas
2019 “Historical perspectives on internal scientific communication.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal, and Thomas Gloning, 547–568. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Gottschling, Markus, and Olaf Kramer
2021 “Recontextualized Knowledge. Introduction: A Rhetorical View on Science Communication.” In Recontextualized Knowledge: Rhetoric – Situation – Science Communication, ed. by Olaf Kramer, and Markus Gottschling, 1–16. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Gropp, Robert
2006 “Teaching the Public about Science.” BioScience 56 (2): 91.
Hanauska, Monika
2019 “Historical aspects of external science communication.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal and Thomas Gloning, 585–600. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Hayes, Richard, and Daniel Grossman
2006A Scientist’s Guide to Talking with the Media: Practical Advice from the Union of Concerned Scientists. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Hendriks, Friederike, and Dorothe Kienhues
2019 “Science understanding between scientific literacy and trust: contributions from psychological and educational research.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal and Thomas Gloning, 29–50. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Hennig, Mathilde, and Dániel Czicza
2017 “Zur Pragmatik und Grammatik der Wissenschaftskommunikation. Ein Modellierungsvorschlag.” Fachsprache 33 (1–2): 36–60.
Horst, Maja, Sarah R. Davies, and Alan Irwin
2017 “Reframing Science Communication.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. by Ulrike Felt, Rayvon Fouché, Clark A. Miller, and Laurel Smith-Doerr, 881–907. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, Dietram A. Scheufele and Dan Kahan
(eds)2017The Oxford Handbook of the Science of Science Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Janich, Nina
2019 “The contribution of linguistics and semiotics to the understanding of science communication.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Annette, Marcelo Dascal and Thomas Gloning, 143–166. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Janich, Nina, and Nina Kalwa
2018 “Wissenschaftskommunikation.” In Handbuch Pragmatik, ed. By Frank Liedtke, and Astrid Tuchen, 413–422. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler.
Jenkins, Edgar W.
2013 “The ‘nature of science’ in the school curriculum: the great survivor.” Journal of Curriculum Studies 45 (2): 132–151.
Kimmerle, Joachim
2021 “How Layperson Process Health News Articles.” In Recontextualized Knowledge: Rhetoric – Situation – Science Communication, ed. by Olaf Kramer, and Markus Gottschling, 169–182. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Leßmöllmann, Annette, Marcelo Dascal and Thomas Gloning
(eds)2019Science Communication. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Leßmöllmann, Annette and Thomas Gloning, Thomas
2019 “Introduction to the volume.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal and Thomas Gloning, XI–XX. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
2017 “Field-specific mediatization: Testing the combination of social theory and mediatization theory using the example of scientific communication.” Mediatization Studies 1 (1): 45–67.
Mar, Florie Anne, Jose Ordovas-Montanes, Nir Oksenberg, Alexander M. Olson
2016 “The Whiteboard Revolution: Illuminating Science Communication in the Digital Age.” Trends in Immunology 37 (4): 250–253.
2014 “The cultural side of science communication.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111 (4): 13621–13626.
Mehlenbacher, Ashley Rose
2019Science Communication Online. Engaging Experts and Public on the Internet. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
Metcalfe, Jennifer Ellen
2019 “Comparing science communication theory with practice: An assessment and critique using Australian data.” Public Understanding of Science 28 (4): 1–19.
Müller, Marcus
2021 “Necessity, Norm and Missing Knowledge. What Modals Tell Us About Crisis Response in German COVID-19 Reporting.” Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 51 (3): 421–450.
Nicolescu, Basarab
2014 “Multidisciplinarity, Interdisciplinarity, Indisciplinarity, and Transdisciplinarity: Similarities and Differences.” In Minding the Gap: Working Across Disciplines in Environmental Studies, ed. by Rob Emmett, and Frank Zelko, 19–26. Munich: Rachel Carson Center.
Pearce, Amy, Aldemaro RomeroJr., and John B. Zibluk
2009 “An Interdisciplinary Approach to Science Communication Education. A Case Study.” In Communication Science, ed. by LeeAnn Kahlor, and Patricia A. Stout, 235–252. New York/London: Routledge.
Reincke, Cathelijne M., Annelien L. Bredenoord, and Marc H. W. van Mil
2020 “From deficit to dialogue inscience communication. The dialogue communication model requires additional roles from scientists.” EMBO reports 21 (e51278): 1–4.
Scheufele, Dietram A.
2014 “Science Communication as political communication.” Proceedings of the Nationa Academy of Sciences.
Schmid-Petri, Hannah and Moritz Bürger
2019 “Modeling science communication: from linear to more complex models.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal und Thomas Gloning, 105–122. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Schuster, Britt-Marie
2019 “The contribution of terminology research to the understanding of science communication.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal und Thomas Gloning, 167–186. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Schäfer, Mike S., Sabrina H. Kessler, and Birte Fähnrich
2019 “Analyzing science communication through the lens of communication science: Reviewing the empirical evidence.” In Science Communication, ed. by Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal and Thomas Gloning, 77–104. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Semino, Elena
2021 “ ‘Not Soldiers but Fire-fighters’ – Metaphors and Covid-19.” Health Communication 36 (1): 50–58.
Simmerling, Anne, and Nina Janich
2016 “Rhetorical functions of a ‘language of uncertainty’ in the mass media.” In Public Understanding of Science 25 (8): 961–975.