Recent Saccadic Eye Movement Research Uncovers Patterns of Cognitive Dysfunction in Schizophrenia.

The frontal cortex and the subcortical areas of the brain play a major role in the control of thought and action. Eye movements are increasingly used in neuropsychological research to explore the executive and sensorimotor functions of such neural networks. This interface links the control of action, at the fundamental levels of neurophysiological and neurochemical processes, with the high-level cognitive operations that underlie visual orienting. Patients with schizophrenia have neurocognitive impairments that can be readily investigated with novel saccadic eye movement paradigms. Animal, human lesion, and neuroimaging studies have identified the cerebral centers that underlie saccadic eye movements. The areas of the prefrontal cortex include the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the frontal eye fields, the supplementary eye fields, and the anterior cingulate gyrus. Pathology of saccadic eye movements therefore provides information on the functional status of the underlying neural circuitry in brain disorders such as schizophrenia

Towards the reflective science communication practitioner

The practice of science communication is fundamentally changing. This requires science communication practitioners to continuously adapt their practice to an ever-changing ecosystem and highlights the importance of reflective practice for science communication. In this study, we supported 21 science communication practitioners in developing a reflective practice. Our study shows that reflective practice enabled practitioners in becoming aware of their own stance towards science or assumptions regarding audiences (single-loop learning), underlying and sometimes conflicting values or worldviews present in science communication situations (double-loop learning), and facilitated practitioners to adapt their practice accordingly. Triple-loop learning, allowing practitioners to fundamentally rethink and transform their mode of science communication, was less observed. We argue that reflective practice contributes to opening-up public conversations on science — including a conversation on underlying values, worldviews, and emotions, next to communicating scientific facts

Creating room for citizen perspectives in ‘smart city’ Amsterdam through interactive theatre

The ‘smart city’ vision is popular, but it lacks citizen perspectives. The aim of this study was to gain insight into whether and how art-based citizen engagement can create more room for citizen perspectives in smart cities by developing and testing an art-based citizen engagement project in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. To that end, a combination of interactive theatre, interaction design and social research methods was used to bring together diverse publics and innovation professionals for joint exploration of increased dataveillance in cities. The events were studied through observations, and through interviews with participants and organisers. Data analysis was guided by the outcomes, processes and challenges of the responsible innovation dimensions: inclusion, reflexivity, anticipation and responsiveness (Stilgoe et al., 2013). The most important achievements of art-based citizen engagement were: engaging people who would not have engaged with the topic otherwise, encouraging participants to question common phrases and assumptions, exploring future social implications of technologies, and staging meaningful interactions between citizens and professionals. The most significant challenge was to involve citizens in a way that could influence innovation trajectories

Juggling roles, experiencing dilemmas: the challenges of SSH scholars in public engagement

The progressive introduction of emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology, has created a true testing ground for public engagement initiatives. Widespread experimentation has taken place with public and stakeholder dialogue and inclusive approaches to research and innovation (R&I) more generally. Against this backdrop, Social Science and Humanities (SSH) scholars have started to manifest themselves differently. They have taken on new roles in the public engagement field, including more practical and policy-oriented ones that seek to actively open the R&I system to wider public scrutiny. With public engagement gaining prominence, there has been a call for increased reflexivity among SSH scholars about their role in this field. In this paper, we study our own roles and stakes as SSH scholars in a European-funded public engagement project on responsible nanotechnology. We introduce a general role landscape and outline five distinct roles (engaged academic, deliberative practitioner, change agent, dialogue capacity builder, and project worker) that we-as SSH scholars-inhabited throughout the project. We discuss the synergistic potential of combining these five roles and elaborate on several tensions within the roles that we needed to navigate. We argue that balancing many roles requires explicit role awareness, reflexivity, and new competencies that have not been examined much in the public engagement literature so far. Our role landscape and exemplification of how it can be used to reflexively study one's own practices may be a useful starting point for scholars who are seeking to better understand, assess, or communicate about their position in the public engagement field.Science Communication and Societ