AbramowitzAlan I.2011. The disappearing center: Engaged citizens,
polarization, and American democracy. New Haven,
CT: Yale University
Press.
2.
BarkerGillianKitcherPhilip. 2014. Philosophy of science: A new
introduction. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
3.
BrossardDominiqueLewensteinBruce
V.2009. A critical appraisal of models of public
understanding of science: Using practice to inform theory.
In Communicating science: New agendas in communication, eds.
KahlorLeeAnnStoutPatricia, 11–39. New York,
NY:
Routledge.
4.
BrownMark B.2009. Science in democracy: Expertise, institutions, and
representation. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
5.
DavenportCoral. 8May2014. Florida finding itself in eye of storm on
climate change. New York Times,
A1, A15.
6.
DouglasHeather E.2009. Science, policy, and the value-free ideal.
Pittsburgh, PA: University of
Pittsburgh Press.
7.
DruckmanJames N.PetersonErikSlothuusRune. 2013. How elite partisan
polarization affects public opinion formation.
American Political Science Review170:57–79.
8.
GustonDavid H.2000. Between politics and science: Assuring the integrity
and productivity of research.
Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
9.
HackettEdward J.AmsterdamskaOlgaLynchMichaelWajcmanJudy, eds. 2008. The handbook of science and
technology studies, 3rd ed.Cambridge, MA: The MIT
Press.
10.
HartP. SolNisbetEric C.2012. Boomerang effects in science communication:
How motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about
climate mitigation policies. Communication
Research39 (6):
701–23.
11.
JasanoffSheila. 2012. Contested boundaries in
policy-relevant science. In Science and public
reason, 103–32. New
York, NY:
Routledge.
12.
KahanDan M.Jenkins-SmithHankBramanDonald. 2011. Cultural cognition of
scientific consensus. Journal of Risk
Research14 (2):
147–74.
13.
KitcherPhilip. 2001. Science, truth, and
democracy. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
14.
KitcherPhilip. 2011. Science in a democratic
society. Amherst, NY:
Prometheus.
15.
LodgeMiltonTaberCharles S.2013. The rationalizing voter. New
York, NY: Cambridge University
Press.
16.
LupiaArthur. 2014. What is the value of social
science? Challenges for researchers and government funders.
PS: Political Science & Politics
(January):1–7.
17.
MackArien, ed. 2006. Politics and science: A
historical overview. Social Research73 (4):
v–vi.
18.
McCartyNolanRosenthalHowardPooleKeith T.2006. Polarized America. Cambridge,
MA: The MIT
Press.
19.
MillerJon D.1998. The measurement of civic scientific
literacy. Public Understanding of Science7:203–24.
20.
National Climate Assessment. 2014. Climate
change impacts in the United States. Available from http://nca2014.globalchange.gov.
NisbetMatthew C.2009. Framing science: A new paradigm in public
engagement. In Communicating science: New agendas in
communication, eds. KahlorLeeAnnStoutPatricia, 40–67. New York,
NY:
Routledge.
PielkeRoger
A.Jr. 2007. The honest broker: Making sense of
science in policy and politics.
Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
25.
PopperKarl. 2001. All life is problem
solving. New York, NY:
Routledge.
26.
ReillyMollie. 14May2014. Marco Rubio attempts to link climate change to
abortion. The Huffington
Post.
27.
RokeachMilton. 1973. The nature of human values.
New York, NY: Free
Press.
28.
SchwartzShalom H.1992. Universals in the content and structure of
values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20
countries. In Advances in experimental social
psychology, vol. 25, ed. ZannaMark P., 1–66. San Diego,
CA: Academic
Press.
29.
VinikDanny. 2014. Pikettymania must stop: A
plea for calm in the debate over “capital.”New Republic. Available from http://www.newrepublic.com.
