How are scientific controvesies framed?

Since 2001, Professor Brigitte Nerlich has led a team of researchers studying the cultural and political contexts in which metaphors and other framing devices are used to influence and shape public, policy and scientific debates about emerging technologies, emerging diseases, and climate change.

From nanotechnology to ‘Climategate’, language is fundamental to the way publics make sense of and negotiate scientific controversy.

Highlights

The project involved contributions from a diverse team including: Professor Paul Crawford, Professor Ron Carter, Dr Nelya Koteyko (Leicester), Dr Martin Doering (Hamburg), Professor Brian Brown (De Montford), Dr Maurizio Meloni and Dr Rusi Jaspal.

The many peer-reviewed articles produced during this period include: the first social science article to be published on 'Climategate' following the affair, a groundbreaking piece on nano images, and the first and only study of poems written during the foot and mouth crisis.

For a selection of work produced by the ‘metaphor team’ over the last decade, visit Professor Nerlich’s personal website.

Expertise

Professor Nerlich has been working on language and metaphor for over twenty years, and is a member of the Academy of Social Sciences. She uses methods and ideas from cognitive linguistics, social and cultural anthropology, the history of science, and science and technology studies to analyse cultural imagination and the contemporary portrayal of issues related to health and illness, emerging technologies (bio, cogno, nano, synbio, geo-engineering), and climate change.