LEADER 04281nam  22006855  450 
001 9910917172003321
005 20251113180014.0
010   $a9789819792221
010   $a9819792223
024 7 $a10.1007/978-981-97-9222-1
035   $a(CKB)37036216700041
035   $a(MiAaPQ)EBC31879498
035   $a(Au-PeEL)EBL31879498
035   $a(DE-He213)978-981-97-9222-1
035   $a(EXLCZ)9937036216700041
100   $a20241213d2025      u|         0
101 0 $aeng
135   $aur|||||||||||
181   $ctxt$2rdacontent
182   $cc$2rdamedia
183   $acr$2rdacarrier
200 10$aExpert Consensus in Science /$fby Anthony Jorm
205   $a1st ed. 2025.
210  1$aSingapore :$cSpringer Nature Singapore :$cImprint: Palgrave Macmillan,$d2025.
215   $a1 online resource (241 pages)
311 08$a9789819792214 
311 08$a9819792215 
327   $aChapter 1: The Controversy over Expert Consensus in Science -- Chapter 2: Consensus Pervades Scientific Processes -- Chapter 3: Expert Consensus to Establish Scientific Truths -- Chapter 4: Spontaneous and Deliberative Processes to Reach Consensus -- Chapter 5: Expert Consensus to Guide Practice and Policy -- Chapter 6: Expert Consensus on Research Methods -- Chapter 7: Specifying ?Experts? and ?Consensus? -- Chapter 8: Methods for Determining Deliberative Consensus -- Chapter 9: How Wisdom-of-Crowds Research Can Help Improve Deliberative Consensus Methods -- Chapter 10: Towards a ?Wisdom of Scientific Crowds? -- Chapter 11: Using Expert Consensus to Persuade the Public.
330   $aThis Open Access book shows how expert consensus pervades all areas of science. It explores, in particular, the role of consensus in establishing scientific truth, in guiding professional practice and policy and agreeing on what are acceptable scientific methodologies. For some scientific issues, a consensus forms spontaneously among scientists working on a topic, while for others, where the issues are complex, a formal deliberative consensus process is commonly needed. Deliberative consensus processes are becoming more important as scientists increasingly deal with complex multi-disciplinary issues of policy importance such as climate change due to human activity. While deliberative consensus processes are commonly used, they often lead to criticism from consensus skeptics. The book argues that deliberative consensus processes in science can be improved and proposes a number of realistic ways forward, ending with a discussion of whether communicating the scientific consensus on a topic is a good way to persuade the public. Anthony Jorm is an Emeritus Professor at the University of Melbourne and National Health & Medical Research Council Leadership Fellow. His research focuses on building the community?s capacity for prevention and early intervention with mental disorders. He has particular methodological expertise in the use of the Delphi consensus method in health research. He is Editor-in-Chief of the journal Mental Health & Prevention. He is the co-founder and Director of the not-for-profit organization Mental Health First Aid International.
606   $aScience$xSocial aspects
606   $aExpertise
606   $aScience$xPhilosophy
606   $aScience in popular culture
606   $aCommunication in science
606   $aScience and Technology Studies
606   $aExpertise Studies
606   $aSociology of Science
606   $aPhilosophy of Science
606   $aPublic Understanding of Science
606   $aScience Communication
615  0$aScience$xSocial aspects.
615  0$aExpertise.
615  0$aScience$xPhilosophy.
615  0$aScience in popular culture.
615  0$aCommunication in science.
615 14$aScience and Technology Studies.
615 24$aExpertise Studies.
615 24$aSociology of Science.
615 24$aPhilosophy of Science.
615 24$aPublic Understanding of Science.
615 24$aScience Communication.
676   $a501.9
700   $aJorm$b Anthony$0171969
801  0$bMiAaPQ
801  1$bMiAaPQ
801  2$bMiAaPQ
906   $aBOOK
912   $a9910917172003321
996   $aExpert Consensus in Science$94330168
997   $aUNINA