ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2026 ANS Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
Mar 2026
Jan 2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
April 2026
Nuclear Technology
February 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Going Nuclear: Notes from the officially unofficial book tour
I work in the analytical labs at one of Europe’s oldest and largest nuclear sites: Sellafield, in northwestern England. I spend my days at the fume hood front, pipette in one hand and radiation probe in the other (and dosimeter pinned to my chest, of course). Outside the lab, I have a second job: I moonlight as a writer and public speaker. My new popular science book—Going Nuclear: How the Atom Will Save the World—came out last summer, and it feels like my life has been running at full power ever since.
Larissa Shasko, Michaela Neetz, Margot Hurlbert, Jeremy Rayner, Dazawray Landrie-Parker
Nuclear Technology | Volume 208 | Number 6 | June 2022 | Pages 935-946
Technical Paper – Special section on the Nuclear, Humanities, and Social Science Nexus | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2021.1996842
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Social learning aims to produce a change in both understanding and behavior on the part of individuals that diffuses to wider social units and communities of practice. This paper asks: What lessons from the social learning literature can be applied to research and public engagement with respect to radiation exposure risk? Five key lessons were assembled, and recent survey results were used to demonstrate how these lessons can be applied to outline a risk communication strategy that includes, but is not limited to, well-designed engagement. The marked divergence between public and “expert” opinion on radiation exposure risk remains at the heart of current debates over the role of nuclear energy in tackling climate change. Earlier literature tended to be dismissive of the risk gap, siding with the experts and branding the public “radiophobic.” We show how applying the findings of the literature review to the design and analysis of the survey can overcome shortcomings of past approaches and build on strengths. This paper seeks to demonstrate the importance and interrelated nature of mixed-methods studies where quantitative and qualitative analysis is combined. This includes avoiding overly binary approaches of study and finding ways to open up conversations and exchanges. This exploration of social learning and public engagement highlights the potential barriers nuclear energy faces in contributing to the future energy mix and challenges current practices to be more perceptive to the spectrum of public positions to radiation exposure risk.