| Abstract [eng] |
T he article presents an analys of W. Garveys and B. Griffith’s (1971, 1972, 1979), UNISIST (1971), F. W. Lankaster’s (1978), N. Fjallbrant’s (1997), T. M. Aitchison’s (1988), E. Buck’s, R. Flagan’s and B. Coles (1999), J. Hurd’s (2000), T. F. Sondergaard’s, J. Andersen’s, B. Hjorland’s revising and updating UNISIST (2003), Kling’s, G. McKim’s and A. King’ (2003), J. M. Makenzy Owen’s (2000, 2007), B.-C. Bjork’s (2007) theoretical models of science communication. The analysis of traditional formal science communication in these models indicated typical science communication subjects and functions in science communication. In the traditional formal science communication model, the process of science communication is perceived as an information chain. The analysis showed that the teorethical basis of these models is the concept of process communication. Information and communication technologies have been applied to science communication. Due to these technologies, communication culture in sciences has changed. The analysis of science communication models, which evaluate technological and cultural changes, showed the coming of new communication mediators and multifuncionality of all communication subjects. In the new science communication models the process of science communication is perceived as an alternative and the intersecting information chains as an information network. One apparent change is the convergence of formal and informal science communication. Due to this convergence, the concept of communicated message has changed. New tendencies allow to consider the emerging semantic approach to the concept of communication in science communication. |
