Experts in Society: In discussions involving science, non-experts often have to trust the opinions of experts. However, who we consider an "expert" and how far their expertise extends is negotiated socially and requires judgments about their credibility. For example, we might consider a heart surgeon an expert in cardiology but not in climate change.

Real-world example: Think about a school debate on climate change. A geography teacher could be considered an expert because of their scientific knowledge, but a local farmer could also be an expert because of their practical experience with changing weather patterns.

Public Attention: When science enters public discussions, especially those involving controversial issues, its authority and the authority of those speaking on its behalf are tested. Examples include debates on climate change, air pollution, and vaccine hesitancy.

Real-world example: During the COVID-19 pandemic, scientists' authority was tested when they had to communicate complex virology concepts to the public, while also combating misinformation.

Complex Ecosystem: In policy-making, science must be communicated effectively in a complicated ecosystem influenced by money, politics, and competition.

Questions of Power & Legitimacy: Science in policy-making raises questions about power, legitimacy, and balancing democracy with scientific autonomy. For instance, who can speak authoritatively on science-policy intersections?

Real-world example: During the introduction of genetically modified crops, the debate wasn't just about the science but also about which voices - scientists, politicians, farmers, or corporations - had the authority to make decisions.

Scientific Controversy: The scientific controversy over whether HIV causes AIDS wasn't limited to academia but permeated social and political realms, affected by contemporary attitudes and beliefs about homosexuality, addiction, and sexual freedom.

Treatment Debate: The debate about AIDS treatment involved not only scientists but also non-experts with various motivations. For instance, pharmaceutical companies that could profit, journalists reporting on developments, and patients directly affected.

Citizen Involvement: AIDS activists managed to understand complex biomedical claims and influence the methodologies of knowledge production about AIDS treatment. This blurs the lines between expert and non-expert and redistributes power, credibility, and trust.