A systematic review of the deficit model and call for empowerment toward informed publics
Abstract
The deficit model, assuming some deficit in the public relevant to science, is one of the most influential and discussed models of science communication. Despite its popularity, the literature appears to lack a unified definition and heavily criticizes the model. The first aim of the current work is to create clarity on the deficit model and as such address the controversy surrounding it. We distill a definition of the deficit model through a systematic review of all works in which the model plays a key role (k = 178). The results demonstrate that there is no such thing as the deficit model. Instead, descriptions take many forms, making the model too broad and imprecise to test empirically or apply in practice. The second aim is to investigate if we can build on the deficit model to create a more specific and testable model for scientific information dissemination. To that end, we introduce a new model that addresses criticism of the deficit model, focuses on informing publics, and is empirically testable. This empowerment model of informed publics identifies publics not as deficient, but as active agents that should be informed and empowered. Finally, we set out areas of research for science communication scholars investigating how to inform publics.
