From the Editors: Communicating animal science to the public, policymakers, and students
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This issue of Animal Frontiers, “Communicating the Animal Sciences Effectively,” focuses on the challenges associated with how best to communicate animal science information with policymakers, the public, and students. Communicating effectively with these stakeholder groups is critical to the future of the livestock and poultry industries. In addition, the general public gets most of its information related to food systems from the internet, family, or friends, and these sources often contain inaccurate information. It is not surprising, then, that communication about the production of meat, milk, and eggs has become increasingly difficult. The article by Johnson and Hamernik (2015) explores the reasons effective communication is important for how the public makes informed decisions. Scientists often try to educate the public with the hope that a better understanding of scientific and technical facts will enable the public to view controversial issues from the same perspective as a scientist. However, the public is also interested in the social, ethical, and economic aspects of issues. Effective communication on issues related to the management of livestock and poultry will require a commitment to building trust, shared values, ethics, and credible expertise. Glenn et al. (2015) describe the importance of sound agricultural and livestock policies in the United States to allow opportunities for animal science research, education, and extension activities that will be necessary to meet the growing demand for animal-sourced foods. Although most American politicians do not understand science, the unified voice of thousands of animal scientists as advocates for federal funding for animal science research or research friendly policies and regulations can have a tremendous, positive impact on elected officials. Federal policies and regulations in the United States are made based on emotions, trust, scientific facts, and clear and concise communication. Fraser (2015) provides a historical perspective of how science influenced Canadian policy for the welfare of farm animals. Development of national, science-based standards for farm animal welfare in Canada resulted from the timely actions of a number of stakeholder groups, including livestock producers, national producer organizations, retailers, and scientists. Each of these groups provided trusted individuals to participate in conversations and engage in debates on controversial issues associated with the welfare of farm animals. Social media, the internet, and conversations with the public and policymakers can be used to provide more information about the production of meat, milk, and eggs. This information can enhance a stakeholder’s ability to make informed decisions and to refute misinformed communications
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle