scholarly journals On the roles of scientists, press officers and journalists

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (03) ◽  
pp. E ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Weitkamp
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
News Production ◽  
The Public

This issue of the Journal of Science Communication raises a number of questions about the ways that new scientific research emerges from research institutions and in particular the role played by scientists, press officers and journalists in this process. This is not to suggest that the public don't play an equally important role, and several articles in this issue raise questions about public engagement, but to explore the dynamics at play in one specific arena: that of news production. In this editorial I explore the increasing reliance of science journalists on public relations sources and consider what questions this raises for science communication.

scholarly journals Promoting Public Engagement of Natural History Collections through Science Communication

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. e28479
Author(s):  
Bryan Lessard
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Natural History ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Public Speaking ◽  
Wide Audience ◽  
The Public ◽  
Natural History Collections ◽  
New Students

Natural history collections are essential for understanding the world’s biodiversity and drive research in taxonomy, systematics, ecology and biosecurity. One of the biggest challenges faced is the decline of new taxonomists and public interest in collections-based research, which is alarming considering that an estimated 70% of the world’s species are yet to be formally described. Science communication combines public relations with the dissemination of scientific knowledge and offers many benefits to promoting natural history collections to a wide audience. For example, social media has revolutionised the way collections and their staff communicate with the public in real time, and can attract more visitors to collection exhibits and new students interested in natural history. Although not everyone is born a natural science communicator, institutions can encourage and provide training for their staff to become engaging spokespeople skilled in social media and public speaking, including television, radio and/or print media. By embracing science communication, natural history collections can influence their target audiences in a positive and meaningful way, raise the profile of their institution, encourage respect for biodiversity, promote their events and research outputs, seek philanthropic donations, connect with other researchers or industry leaders, and most importantly, inspire the next generation of natural historians.

scholarly journals Research institutions: neither doing science communication nor promoting ‘public’ relations

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (03) ◽  
pp. C03 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michel Claessens
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Internal Communication ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
High Quality ◽  
The Public ◽  
Proper Sense ◽  
Scientific Staff ◽  
Genuine Communication

In this commentary I explain why research institutions are neither doing science communication nor developing ‘public’ relations in the proper sense. Their activities are rather a mix of different things, serving various purposes and targets. However, dealing with PCST, their main responsibilities [should] include: promoting genuine communication and dialogue, being open and accessible to the public, providing high quality scientific information, ensuring good internal communication and educating their scientific staff.

scholarly journals Towards sustainable public engagement (outreach)

2016 ◽  
pp. 41-46
Author(s):  
Timothy G Harrison ◽  
Dudley E Shallcross
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Senior Management ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
First Year ◽  
Financial Cost ◽  
The Public ◽  
Full Support ◽  
Public Engagement In Science ◽  
Science Departments

There are myriad benefits to science departments that have a public engagement in science portfolio in addition to any recruitment of new undergraduates. These benefits are discussed in this paper and include: improving congruence between A level and first year undergraduate courses, training in science communication and the breaking down of barriers between the public and universities. All activity requires investment of personnel and incurs a financial cost. Small scale activities may be able to absorb this cost, but ultimately as the portfolio grows this will become an increasing drain on resources. Bristol ChemLabS Outreach has, from the very start, set out to be fully sustainable financially and in terms of personnel. A very important component is the full support of the senior management team. In this paper we discuss how we have achieved this.

scholarly journals To crowdfund research, scientists must build an audience for their work

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarrett E Byrnes ◽  
Jai Ranganathan ◽  
Barbara L. E. Walker ◽  
Zen Faulkes
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Project Proposal ◽  
Direct Involvement ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Arts ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Research Scientists ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Audience Size

As rates of traditional sources of scientific funding decline, scientists have become increasingly interested in crowdfunding as a means of bringing in new money for research. In fields where crowdfunding has become a major venue for fundraising such as the arts and technology, building an audience for one’s work is key for successful crowdfunding. For science, to what extent does audience building, via engagement and outreach, increase a scientist’s abilities to bring in money via crowdfunding? Here we report on an analysis of the #SciFund Challenge, a crowdfunding experiment in which 159 scientists attempted to crowdfund their research. Using data gathered from a survey of participants, internet metrics, and logs of project donations, we find that public engagement is the key to crowdfunding success. Building an audience or “fanbase” and actively engaging with that audience as well as seeking to broaden the reach of one’s audience indirectly increases levels of funding. Audience size and effort interact to bring in more people to view a scientist’s project proposal, leading to funding. We discuss how projects capable of raising levels of funds commensurate with traditional funding agencies will need to incorporate direct involvement of the public with science. We suggest that if scientists and research institutions wish to tap this new source of funds, they will need to encourage and reward activities that allow scientists to engage with the public.

scholarly journals Open Science and the Science-Society Relationship

Society ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 246-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Lakomý ◽  
Renata Hlavová ◽  
Hana Machackova
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Future Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
Science Society ◽  
Scientific Institutions

Abstract Nowadays, the prevailing trend in the science-society relationship is to engage with the broader public, which is beneficial for the public, scientific institutes, scientific findings, and the legitimacy of science as a whole. This article provides a broad review of the rapidly growing research on Open Science and identifies the gaps in the current knowledge for future research. The review focuses on the science-society relationship, such that knowledge from this field is summarised and systematised. Insight into the most salient topics, including science communication, public engagement with science, public cognition of science, and challenges and potential unintended consequences connected to interactions with the public are examined. The first section of the paper focuses on science communication which involves efforts and approaches to inform the public about science by the most effective means. The section on public engagement reviews how scientists and scientific institutions are increasingly involved in direct interactions with the public and different groups of stakeholders to make science more open. The section focusing on public cognition of science provides information about public knowledge, perception, and trust regarding science, which both determines and is formed by public engagement. Last, risks, ethical issues, and data issues connected to the implementation of Open Science principles are reviewed, as there are many unintended consequences of Open Science which are examined by this current research. In conclusion, research covering the science-society relationship is rapidly growing. However, it brings multiple challenges as well as opportunities which are captured and discussed in a variety of existing studies. This article provides a coherent overview of this field in order to bring more comprehensible knowledge to scientists, scientific institutions, and outreach professionals.

Effects of gender harassment on science popularization behaviors

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 718-728
Author(s):  
Lisa McDonald ◽  
Chantal Barriault ◽  
Thomas Merritt
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Gender Harassment ◽  
The Public ◽  
Science Popularization ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Clothing Choices

In this pilot study, we used a mixed methods online survey to ask science popularizers how gender harassment influences the way they communicate science to the public. Popularizers reported that gender harassment caused the science popularization field to increasingly strive for gender inclusivity in the creation of content. However, harassment made female popularizers feel they must emphasize their legitimacy, quite conscious of their clothing choices, and wary of engaging the public through mediums or topics that provoke more severe harassment. Implications for science communication and public engagement are discussed.

scholarly journals To crowdfund research, scientists must build an audience for their work

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarrett E Byrnes ◽  
Jai Ranganathan ◽  
Barbara L. E. Walker ◽  
Zen Faulkes
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Project Proposal ◽  
Direct Involvement ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Arts ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Research Scientists ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Audience Size

As rates of traditional sources of scientific funding decline, scientists have become increasingly interested in crowdfunding as a means of bringing in new money for research. In fields where crowdfunding has become a major venue for fundraising such as the arts and technology, building an audience for one’s work is key for successful crowdfunding. For science, to what extent does audience building, via engagement and outreach, increase a scientist’s abilities to bring in money via crowdfunding? Here we report on an analysis of the #SciFund Challenge, a crowdfunding experiment in which 159 scientists attempted to crowdfund their research. Using data gathered from a survey of participants, internet metrics, and logs of project donations, we find that public engagement is the key to crowdfunding success. Building an audience or “fanbase” and actively engaging with that audience as well as seeking to broaden the reach of one’s audience indirectly increases levels of funding. Audience size and effort interact to bring in more people to view a scientist’s project proposal, leading to funding. We discuss how projects capable of raising levels of funds commensurate with traditional funding agencies will need to incorporate direct involvement of the public with science. We suggest that if scientists and research institutions wish to tap this new source of funds, they will need to encourage and reward activities that allow scientists to engage with the public.

scholarly journals To crowdfund research, scientists must build an audience for their work

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarrett E Byrnes ◽  
Jai Ranganathan ◽  
Barbara L. E. Walker ◽  
Zen Faulkes
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Project Proposal ◽  
Direct Involvement ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Arts ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Research Scientists ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Audience Size

As rates of traditional sources of scientific funding decline, scientists have become increasingly interested in crowdfunding as a means of bringing in new money for research. In fields where crowdfunding has become a major venue for fundraising such as the arts and technology, building an audience for one’s work is key for successful crowdfunding. For science, to what extent does audience building, via engagement and outreach, increase a scientist’s abilities to bring in money via crowdfunding? Here we report on an analysis of the #SciFund Challenge, a crowdfunding experiment in which 159 scientists attempted to crowdfund their research. Using data gathered from a survey of participants, internet metrics, and logs of project donations, we find that public engagement is the key to crowdfunding success. Building an audience or “fanbase” and actively engaging with that audience as well as seeking to broaden the reach of one’s audience indirectly increases levels of funding. Audience size and effort interact to bring in more people to view a scientist’s project proposal, leading to funding. We discuss how projects capable of raising levels of funds commensurate with traditional funding agencies will need to incorporate direct involvement of the public with science. We suggest that if scientists and research institutions wish to tap this new source of funds, they will need to encourage and reward activities that allow scientists to engage with the public.

Science of Communicating Science

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig Cormick
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Practice Research ◽  
Practical Advice ◽  
The Public

Are you wishing you knew how to better communicate science, without having to read several hundred academic papers and books on the topic? Luckily Dr Craig Cormick has done this for you! This highly readable and entertaining book distils best practice research on science communication into accessible chapters, supported by case studies and examples. With practical advice on everything from messages and metaphors to metrics and ethics, you will learn what the public think about science and why, and how to shape scientific research into a story that will influence beliefs, behaviours and policies.

scholarly journals The Future of Our Seas: Marine scientists and creative professionals collaborate for science communication

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence De Clippele ◽  
Madlaina Michelotti ◽  
Charlotte R. Findlay ◽  
Amy Cartwright ◽  
Qing Fang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Future ◽  
Effective Science ◽  
Collaborative Engagement ◽  
Development Support ◽  
The Impact

To increase awareness of the current challenges facing the marine environment, the Future of Our Seas (FOOS) project brought together the expertise of scientists, public engagement experts and creatives to train and support a group of marine scientists in effective science communication and innovative public engagement. This case study aims to inspire scientists and artists to use the FOOS approach in training, activity design and development support (hereafter called the ‘FOOS programme’) to collaboratively deliver novel and creative engagement activities. The authors reflect on the experiences of the marine scientists: (1) attending the FOOS communication and engagement training; (2) creating and delivering public engagement activities; (3) understanding our audience; and (4) collaborating with artists. The authors also share what the artists and audiences learned from participating in the FOOS public engagement activities. These different perspectives provide new insights for the field with respect to designing collaborative training which maximizes the impact of the training on participants, creative collaborators and the public. Long-term benefits of taking part in the FOOS programme, such as initiating future collaborative engagement activities and positively impacting the scientists’ research processes, are also highlighted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document