The Academy’s record of distinction in Science, Engineering, and Technology dates to its founding mission “to cultivate every art and science which may tend to advance the interest, honor, dignity, and happiness of a free, independent, and virtuous people.” Rather than generate new scientific research, the role of the Academy has been uniquely interdisciplinary, bridging the social sciences and arts with the physical sciences to support a national understanding, belief, and trust in science and discovery. Perhaps no better example of this can be found than in the mid-1800s when the Academy hosted hotly contested debates about a new scientific theory – the theory of evolution.

How much does the public know about science and where does it get its information? Do scientists communicate effectively with the public about their work? What role do the media and our education system play in advancing Americans’ scientific literacy? Two recent Academy publications examine these questions.

The Rumford Prize, which recognizes contributions to the fields of heat and light, broadly interpreted, was first awarded in 1839 and is one of the oldest scientific prizes in the United States. Previous prize recipients include Thomas Edison in 1895, Edwin Land in 1945, and Enrico Fermi in 1953.

The American Academy awarded the 2021 Rumford Prize to astrophysicist Charles L. Bennett for his contributions to the field of cosmology. The virtual award ceremony included remarks by Academy President David Oxtoby, an introduction from theoretical physicist Marc Kamionkowski, a reading of the Rumford Prize citation by astronaut and scientist Kathryn Sullivan, and a presentation from Charles Bennett. An edited version of the speakers’ remarks follows.

May R. Berenbaum presented at the fall Stated Meeting of the Midwest Center of the American Academy. The talk was a condensed and popularized version of her paper titled "Animal-Plant Warfare: Molecular Basis for Cytochrome P450-Mediated Natural Adaptation."

Civic science literacy is key to our democracy, and the current science literacy of American citizens is a concern to many scientists and scientific leaders. An Academy event on “Communicating Science in an Age of Disbelief in Experts” shed light on the growing gap between the scientific community and civilians.

Randy W. Schekman moderated a panel discussion on consensus and controversy in science with Jennifer Doudna, Richard A. Muller, and Pamela Ronald.

Irving Wladawsky-Berger looks at each of the sections in "Perceptions of Science in America": an overview of the general perceptions of science, demographic influences on these views, and a detailed look at three controversial science topics.

Perceptions of Science in America offers an in-depth examination of the current state of trust in science among Americans. The data paint a picture of a heterogeneous public whose perceptions are dependent on context and values. The report underscores the need for additional studies on the influences on attitudes toward science, as well as how those attitudes impact both personal decisions and public support for evidence-based policy.

The Academy’s record of distinction in Science, Engineering, and Technology dates to its founding mission “to cultivate every art and science which may tend to advance the interest, honor, dignity, and happiness of a free, independent, and virtuous people.” Rather than generate new scientific research, the role of the Academy has been uniquely interdisciplinary, bridging the social sciences and arts with the physical sciences to support a national understanding, belief, and trust in science and discovery. Perhaps no better example of this can be found than in the mid-1800s when the Academy hosted hotly contested debates about a new scientific theory–the theory of evolution.

"Early encounters with poverty and harsh conditions played a major role in fueling my research on child maltreatment. I have always preferred addressing complexity over simplicity, and this has led to a multilevel approach in my research."

The class speakers at the Induction Ceremony explored several themes, including the value of curiosity and the unexpected; strategies to prevent scientific failures with harmful consequences; the role of the social sciences in addressing the urgent challenges of today; the processes of transformation and translation; and how openness fosters innovative and sustainable problem-solving. The ceremony featured presentations from theoretical astrophysicist Charles F. Gammie, research ecologist Helene Muller-Landau, lawyer and legal scholar Daniel E. Ho, writer and translator Jhumpa Lahiri, and economist and nonprofit leader Cecilia A. Conrad. An edited version of their presentations follows.

"Science & the Legal System," the Fall 2018 issue of Dædalus, Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, features thirteen essays on topics including the state of the forensic sciences, expert testimony in court, the role of science in abortion law, neuroscience and law, and reforms to the U.S. adversarial system.

On a gray London morning in January, I walked past familiar markers of institutional gravity on my way to the Royal Society. Stone facades. Heavy doors. Plaques engraved with names that have outlived the controversies of their eras. It is easy, in places like this, to slip into a kind of historical reverence that feels comforting, even anesthetizing.

The U.S. must bolster the competitiveness of its commercial space industry, expand international cooperation, and refocus on basic science in order to hold on to its traditional leadership position in space, according to the authors of a new paper from the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

Following World War II, our government forged a commitment to support scientific research. Today, our nation’s standing is threatened due to the under-prioritization of investment in scientific research.

A new report on a survey by the American Academy seeks to begin a process of informing academics on how to respond to anti-intellectual trends. Its key finding is that any attempt to lump together the doubters of science on the many important subjects will impair an effective response.

Scientific advances often provoke deep concern on the part of the public, especially when these advances challenge strongly held political or moral perspectives. In “Do Scientists Understand the Public?,” a new paper based on the Academy study, science journalist Chris Mooney reviews the workshop findings and recommendations.

On October 16, 2024, the Academy hosted a discussion on the importance of science communication and strategies to bridge the gap between science and the public. The event featured Sean Decatur (American Museum of Natural History) and Naomi Oreskes (Harvard University) in conversation with Holden Thorp (American Association for the Advancement of Science). Shirley Malcom (American Association for the Advancement of Science) offered opening remarks and Cristine Russell (formerly, Harvard Kennedy School) provided some final comments.