scholarly journals Communicating astronomy with the public: perspectives of an international community of practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (03) ◽  
pp. A11
Author(s):  
Sara Anjos ◽  
Pedro Russo ◽  
Anabela Carvalho

Communities of practice in science communication can make important contributions to public engagement with science but are under-researched. In this article, we look at the perspectives of a community of practice in astronomy communication regarding (relations with) their public(s). Most participants in this study consider that public(s) have several deficits and vulnerabilities. Moreover, practitioners have little to no contact with (and therefore make no use of) academic research on science communication. We argue that collaboration between science communication researchers and practitioners could benefit the science-public relationship and that communities of practice may be critical to that purpose.

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 269
Author(s):  
Sarah Iqbal ◽  
Banya Kar

Lately, the Indian research ecosystem has seen an upward trend in scientists showing interest in communicating their science and engaging with non-scientific audiences; however, the number and variety of science communication or public engagement activities undertaken formally by scientists remains low in the country. There could be many contributing factors for this trend. To explore this further, the science funding public charity in India, DBT/Wellcome Trust India Alliance (India Alliance), in a first of its kind of study by a funding agency in India, surveyed its 243 research grantees in November 2020 requesting their views on public engagement with science in India through an online survey. The survey included both quantitative as well as open-ended questions to assess the understanding of, participation in, and attitude of India Alliance Fellows/Grantees towards public engagement with research, identify the enablers, challenges, and barriers to public engagement for India Alliance Fellows/Grantees, understand the specific needs (training/capacity-building, funding, etc.) and develop recommendations for India Alliance as well as for the larger scientific ecosystem in the country. The survey showed that India Alliance grantees are largely motivated to engage with the public about science or their research but lack professional recognition and incentives, training and structural support to undertake public engagement activities.


Author(s):  
Julia Metag

The visibility and invisibility of scientific knowledge, its creation, and of scientists are at the core of science communication research. Thus, prominent paradigms, such as the public understanding of science or public engagement with science and technology, have implications for the visibility of scientific knowledge in the scientific community and among the public. This article posits that visibility in science communication is achieved with the availability of scientific knowledge, the approval of its dissemination, and its accessibility to third parties. The public understanding of science and public engagement with science paradigms emphasize different aspects of visibility with the latter focusing on the visibility of the creation of scientific knowledge more than public understanding of science which focuses on the knowledge itself. The digital information environment has engendered new formats and possibilities for visibility but also new risks, thereby creating tensions in science communication.


2022 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elana Kimbrell ◽  
Gemima Philippe ◽  
Mary Catherine Longshore

Scientists’ engagement with society on critical environmental and health issues is essential to reaching positive and equitable long-term outcomes. We argue that stronger institutional support for public engagement is necessary and that inclusive practices should be built into public engagement training and relationships. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)’s Center for Public Engagement with Science and Technology provides a model of support for scientists that we believe other scientific institutions can replicate and expand on. This model prioritizes representative and accessible science communication training, resources (e.g., funding and staff and peer support), opportunities to practice engagement, and rewards and incentives for doing engagement. We describe our programs in each of these areas and reflect on how well each builds scientists’ engagement skills and institutional capacity, and whether each embodies and models thoughtful, accessible, and representative engagement. Through these various approaches, the Center communicates to other scientific institutions that engagement by scientists should be valued, celebrated, and supported, and builds capacity for individual scientists to do effective engagement. We argue that these supports can be applied by other scientific institutions to reflect and incorporate society’s diverse needs and concerns, thus truly serving the public and making science and scientific institutions stronger for it.


Author(s):  
Timothy G Harrison ◽  
Dudley E Shallcross

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.


2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (03) ◽  
pp. E ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Weitkamp

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. e28479
Author(s):  
Bryan Lessard

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 205630511879772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eszter Hargittai ◽  
Tobias Füchslin ◽  
Mike S. Schäfer

While considerable research has looked at how people use the Internet for sharing and engaging with various types of content from celebrity news to politics, very little of this work has considered how non-specialists interact with science and research material on social media. This article reviews literature on public engagement with science to note that this area is ripe for research on social-media-based engagement in particular. Drawing on a survey of American young adults’ online experiences, we show that using social media for science and research is at least as likely if not more so as engagement with other topics from similarly serious to lighter domains. We also find that platform matters with young adults much more likely to engage with such content on Facebook rather than on Twitter. We end by proposing more focus on this domain in the area of science communication and work on social media.


Society ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 246-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Lakomý ◽  
Renata Hlavová ◽  
Hana Machackova

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.


Antibiotics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 465
Author(s):  
Joanna Verran ◽  
Sarah Jackson ◽  
Antony Scimone ◽  
Peter Kelly ◽  
James Redfern

There are few peer-reviewed publications about public engagement with science that are written by microbiologists; those that exist tend to be a narrative of an event rather than a hypothesis-driven investigation. However, it is relatively easy for experienced scientists to use a scientific method in their approach to public engagement. This short communication describes three public engagement activities hosted by the authors, focused on biofilm control: hand hygiene, plaque control and an externally applied antimicrobial coating. In each case, audience engagement was assessed using quantitative and/or qualitative methods. A critical evaluation of the findings enabled the construction of a public engagement ‘tick list’ for future events that would enable a hypothesis-driven approach with more effective communication activities and more robust evaluation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 718-728
Author(s):  
Lisa McDonald ◽  
Chantal Barriault ◽  
Thomas Merritt

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document