Scientific and Lay Knowledge 1 Scientific and Lay Knowledge: The ...

Scientific and Lay Knowledge 1 

Scientific and Lay Knowledge: The Need for Communication and Integration 

Deborah R. Hilbert 

Junior Ford Spring Seminar


Abstract 

Our modern world is defined by science and technology. Scientific knowledge, the peer- 

reviewed information acquired through systematic experimentation or pseudo-experimentation 

and analysis, alone cannot give a complete picture of our earth. Non-scientific lay knowledge, 

everyday knowledge acquired by all people outside of the methodology of science, also 

contributes to our understanding of the world around us. Despite the obvious merits of both 

scientific and non-scientific lay knowledge, scientific knowledge has come to be equated with 

expert knowledge, and the public has lost trust in science, strengthening the boundary between 

the two ways of knowing. Culture plays an important role in defining the differences between 

scientific and lay knowledge and perpetuating the boundary between the two. This paper 

discusses the scientific-lay boundary phenomenon, why the boundary needs to be broken, and 

how this can be done. Integrating scientific and lay knowledge can make knowledge truly 

universal, and higher education facilitates this process by creating individuals who can 

communicate on both sides of the divide and find the common goals of scientific and lay 

communities as well as society as a whole.


Scientific and Lay Knowledge: The Need for Communication and Integration 

Our modern world is defined by science and technology. Behind every household 

appliance, every pill in our medicine cabinet, every modified gene in our food, and even the 

management of our waste, there is a scientist working under scrutinized conditions to improve 

society. And yet, society was not always like this. In fact, there still remain some people who 

live in communities in which the scientific method is not applied to everyday life—and some 

argue cannot be (Harry, 2011). Even within our own fast-paced, technocratic culture lay 

knowledge is prevalent and pertinent. This is because scientific knowledge, the information 

acquired through systematic experimentation or pseudo-experimentation and analysis that is 

peer-reviewed by other trained scientists, does not give a complete picture of our earth. Non- 

scientific knowledge, everyday knowledge acquired by all people outside of the methodology of 

science, also contributes to our understanding of the world around us. 

Scientific knowledge aids in the globalization process by giving people an ability to 

participate in the world economy. Of the five reasons to promote school science education listed 

by the National Research Council, the dependence of economic competitiveness on scientific 

capacity was one (Liu, 2008, p. 304). According to health researcher Peter Harvey (2009), 

scientific knowledge is significant because it is open, verifiable and refutable through a 

methodology that requires review (Harvey, 2009, p.629). Science is an evolving process, and 

contrary to common belief, scientific knowledge is created to be changed. 

Non-scientific lay knowledge is important because it is oftentimes well-adapted to local 

conditions and people. Teresa Johnson (2010) found through her fisheries management study 

that fishermen had a substantial amount of knowledge about the local fisheries that scientists did 

not possess, including information about sea depth and ecosystem interactions (Johnson, 2010).


Traditional Indigenous knowledge is an important example of lay knowledge and is beneficial 

because it is less “compartmentalized” and “reductionist,” as Debra Harry puts it, than Western 

scientific knowledge, and therefore contributes to a interconnected understanding of property and 

life processes (Harry, 2011, p. 722). Lay knowledge is significant in that it is generated by non- 

experts, is available to experts and non-experts alike, and its constraints appear only in the 

structure of the culture of origin. 

Despite the obvious merits of both types of knowledge, scientific knowledge has come to 

be equated with expert knowledge, and the public has lost trust in science, strengthening the 

boundary between the two ways of knowing. This paper discusses this phenomenon, why this 

boundary needs to be broken, and how this can be done. Integrating scientific and lay knowledge 

can make knowledge truly universal, and higher education facilitates this process by creating 

individuals who can communicate on both sides of the divide and find the common goals of 

scientific and lay knowledge. 

The Danger of Emphasizing One Type of Knowledge 

Recently in our history, there has been a paradigm shift in thought that has redefined 

scientific knowledge as expert knowledge. There are dangers in placing too much emphasis in 

one kind of knowledge, however. Results include inequality between the perception and 

treatment of types of knowledge and those who most often utilize them as well as a lack of 

universality and objectivity in science, both of which contribute to a science-lay divide. 

Scientific literacy is almost forced upon society because of its necessity in national development. 

In his paper on scientific literacy and the public, Xiufeng Lui (2009) points out the question of 

whether imposing scientific literacy on students is moral because it makes humans a means to 

the economic ends of others (Lui, 2009, p. 306). Overemphasizing scientific knowledge can lead


to ethical dilemmas. Science seems to pervade all aspects of our lives, while lay knowledge is 

often viewed as illegitimate without scientific verification and ownership. There is a top-down 

approach to acquiring and presenting knowledge in which scientists and associated bureaucrats 

are at the top and the public the bottom. This does not leave room for the input of local and 

indigenous peoples’ knowledge in research and decision-making (Backstrand, 2003, p. 29). Lay 

knowledge can lack the fundamental scope and intricate details that one acquires through 

scientific practice, as well as an understanding of hypothesizing and experimental design useful 

in problem-solving and critical thinking. However, laypeople are too often seen as ignorant and 

unequal, and this aids heavily in creating the divide between the scientific and lay communities. 

What is most interesting is the epistemological analysis of scientific knowledge, 

especially as it is viewed by higher learning institutions. Scientific knowledge is seen as being of 

higher quality than everyday knowledge because of its systematized character in accumulating 

information. This leads to the question of whether one form of knowledge can be privileged over 

another. Science is a process of asking questions and building upon or disproving existing ideas. 

This is just like any other form of human knowing—riddled with mistakes. Claiming that science 

can be universally applied to the world would mean it must be accepted in every aspect of the 

world, but plenty of people and cultures do not accept scientific explanations for certain things. 

Science can only be objective if it applies to everyone, but marginalized groups, whether women, 

socio-economically poor people, or indigenous people, often distrust scientific inquiries and 

findings. This distrust can stem from the wrong-doings of the states the scientists represent, the 

inability of laypeople to make sense of scientific knowledge culturally, or simply a lack of 

communication and involvement of the marginalized group. Placing too much emphasis in 

scientific knowledge further hinders the formation of an adaptable, multi-faceted knowledge.


The Boundary and Its Implications for Society 

The boundary between scientific and lay knowledge is built by overemphasis on 

scientific knowledge as described above, a lack of science literacy in the public, and overall 

cultural misunderstanding. Despite the prevalence and favoring of scientific knowledge in our 

world, science literacy levels are relatively poor for both students and adults (Lui, 2009, p.304). 

This could be a result of inadequate education, as well as the pre-existing barriers to scientific 

knowledge mentioned earlier. 

Cultural misunderstanding between the scientific community and lay communities 

contributes greatly to the divide in knowledge. According to Heidi Grasswick (2010), professor 

of Philosophy at Middlebury College, the non-scientific public wants to know that scientific 

knowledge is reliable, ethical and shared with society (Grasswick, 2010, p.395). Science is not 

perfect, however, so when miscalculations are made or rogue scientists publicized, it is easy for 

the public to lose faith in scientists and scientific knowledge. Sometimes scientific explanations 

can run counter to existing cultural beliefs, in which case time and careful explanations are 

needed in order for a community to understand and find a place for the new information in their 

system of beliefs (Grasswick, 2010). If the barrier we are seeing is indeed a social and cultural 

construct, then societies and their cultures can break it down—a process I believe should happen 

sooner than later. 

Breaking the Barrier: The Benefits of Integration 

Breaking the barrier means integrating the two sources of information into a collaborative 

system of data acquisition, analysis, and sharing. Such a process can lead to the realization of 

common goals, the empowerment of previously ignored sources of knowledge, and improved 

problem solving. We live in an increasingly complex world, which calls for more


interdisciplinary and open-ended approaches to problems. Science alone cannot offer open-ended 

answers because it focuses on such limited, specific topics, while everyday knowledge needs the 

methodology and precision of science. Benefits of the integration of scientific and local 

knowledge have already been observed in conservation efforts of reindeer in Sweden and 

Bonefish in Kiribati, where traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) is incorporated into 

scientific studies (Ramstad et al., 2006). The public and indigenous peoples involved in the 

scientific process feel empowered through their inclusion, and the transparency in the science 

can allow scientists to gain back trust from the public. Science gains its true meaning for the 

majority of society when it is applicable to people and specific situations or contexts. In order to 

be applicable to people, scientific research must incorporate the knowledge local laypeople 

possess. This in turn contributes to the creation of a more universal, versatile knowledge. 

How to Integrate 

Communication, the realization of common goals, and collaborative research can help 

integrate scientific and everyday knowledge. Improved communication includes making 

scientific findings and processes available and understandable to the public. This is done, in part, 

by promoting scientific literacy as well as presenting scientific findings to the public in clear and 

timely manners. Scientists need to understand the people for whom their research is relevant and 

to recognize the importance of these people’s input in creating a comprehensive picture of the 

situation. Both scientists and members of the public must recognize the common goals that link 

them, including desires to better understand the environment, life processes, threats to well- 

being, and conservation. Ramstad et al. found in their study of Maori traditional ecological 

knowledge (TEK) of the Tuatara (the only remaining members of an order of ancient reptiles) 

that scientists and practitioners of TEK share the common goal of the conservation of the


Tuatara, a phenomenon also experienced by researchers in different locations with different 

conservation threats (Ramstad et al., 2006, p. 456). Pinpointing theses common goals encourages 

more trust and makes collaboration more possible. 

Cooperative research is a method of involving non-scientists who possess knowledge on 

a topic in the research process. Teresa Johnson (2010) described a process of translating the 

knowledge of fishermen into scientific knowledge by means of a cooperative research project in 

the northeast U.S. (Johnson, 2010). As a result of the cooperative research, fishermen’s 

knowledge was incorporated into the management and decision-making process, fishermen 

found it easier to participate in management discussions, and both scientists and fishermen found 

increased levels of trust and understanding of each other’s motives (Johnson, 2010). Although 

the non-scientists still found their knowledge to be subject to legitimization by scientists, they 

gained the means to carry out future collaborations with scientists and resource managers 

concerning something that is important to their lifestyles (Johnson, 2010). Ramstad et al. 

determined that TEK provided a rich source of information on a highly threatened and little- 

studied organism, and discrepancies between natives’ knowledge of the Tuatara and scientific 

findings provided direction for further research on conservation of the species (Ramstad et al., 

2006, p. 462). No single explanation of the world is complete, and by incorporating different 

worldviews in research, even if only through the collaboration of non-scientists in the research 

process beginning to end, it becomes easier to view the world holistically—not as a series of 

systems and theories but as a tapestry of relationships. 

The Role of Higher Education in Spanning the Boundary 

Higher education has a unique role in breaking down the barrier that has developed 

between scientific knowledge and lay knowledge. Higher educational institutions must first make


scientific literacy a goal as it allows individuals to understand, critically examine, and relate 

scientific findings. It even permits individuals to change the process of scientific research to 

incorporate collaboration with scholars of different disciplines and with the laypeople whom the 

research most directly affects. It also means individuals can participate fully in modern society, 

taking leadership positions in a world increasingly affected by science. 

Universities and colleges can train thinkers who are scientifically literate and possess the 

skills to ask proper questions, consider different viewpoints, problem-solve and communicate 

effectively on and for both sides of the science-lay divide. Individuals like these are whom 

Johnson (2010) calls “boundary spanners,” and they include scientists as well as non-scientists 

who possess thorough understandings of the complex issues at hand and language aptitude 

(Johnson, 2010, 267). These “boundary spanners” can then go on to facilitate continued 

discussions between scientists and the public. They can also teach the public formally (as in 

educational institutions) or informally (in workshops, council meetings, museums, etc.) in order 

to increase the scientific literacy of the public, thereby giving more power to the public to 

participate in resource management and decision-making processes that are relevant to them. 

Colleges and universities have been contributors to the idea that scientific knowledge is 

more legitimate or noteworthy than everyday knowledge by means of their place as the sole 

trainers of scientific researchers over the centuries as well as their ability to define scientific 

knowledge itself. This idea relates to the discussion by Gert Biesta (2007) of the Institute of 

Education at the University of Stirling of the “knowledge monopoly” of higher education, and 

requires that higher education institutions recognize their epistemological power (Biesta, 2007, p. 

478). Training students to carry out work that is understandable and relatable to the lay


community is one way to go about ensuring that colleges and universities do not abuse their role 

as the trainers and definers of experts. 

Conclusion 

The world today is increasingly globalized and economy-driven. We are facing 

environmental crises like global warming that threaten every member of the human species. This 

means that there needs to be more collaborative efforts in problem-solving and decision-making 

involving scientists and the public because both are in danger and both have knowledge to 

contribute. In order to approach these increasingly complex issues, science must become as 

universal as it has been claimed to be, incorporating the adaptive strategies of local and 

indigenous peoples’ knowledge into the scientific process. If we are to claim to be democratic or 

just supporters of all peoples’ rights, we have to give credit to all types of knowledge and allow 

the public to participate in the scientific process and subsequent decision-making processes. The 

university has the power to create a generation of “boundary spanners” who can aid in the 

communication between the scientific and non-scientific spheres in problem-solving. These 

“boundary spanners” can encourage a continued conversation on the benefits of a new kind of 

knowledge that considers the interconnected quality that life seems to possess when looking at it 

through so many lenses at once.


References 

Backstrand, K. (2003). Civic Science for Sustainability: Reframing the Role of Experts, Policy- 

Makers and Citizens in Environmental Governance. Global Environmental Politics, 3(4), 

24-41. 

Biesta, G. (2007). Towards the knowledge democracy? Knowledge production and the civic role 

of the university. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 26(5), 467-479. 

Grasswick, H. E. (2010). Scientific and lay communities: earning epistemic trust through 

knowledge sharing. Synthese, 177, 387-409. 

Harry, D. (2011). Biocolonialism and Indigenous Knowledge in United Nations Discourse. 

Griffith Law Review, 20(3), 702-728. 

Harvey, P. W. (2009). Science, research and social change in Indigenous health—evolving was 

of knowing. Australian Health Review, 33(4), 628-635. 

Johnson, T. R. (2010). Cooperative research and knowledge flow in the marine commons: 

Lessons from the Northeast United States. International Journal of the Commons, 4(1), 

251-272. 

Liu, X. (2008). Beyond Science Literacy: Science and the Public. International Journal of 

Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 301-311. 

Ramstad, K. M., Nelson, N. J., Paine, G., Beech, D., Paul, A., Paul, P., …Daugherty, C. H. 

(2006). Species and Cultural Conservation in New Zealand: Maori Traditional Ecological 

Knowledge of Tuatara. Conservation Biology, 21(2), 455-464. 

Sava, M. (2011). Public Understanding of Science: Science PR and Popular Culture. Romanian 

Journal of Journalism & Communication, 6(1), 5-13.

Scientific and Lay Knowledge 1 Scientific and Lay Knowledge: The ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?