An official website of the United States government
Communication strategies define audience-specific behavioral goals, identify priority cognitive and affective communication objectives necessary to achieving those goals, and propose specific communication tactics meant to increase the likelihood of achieving those objectives. Unfortunately, it appears that few scientific organizations have concrete, evidence-based strategies. This study therefore uses survey data to explore environmental scientists’ willingness to prioritize the behavioral goal of creating a shared public engagement strategy. It finds that the best predictor of prioritizing strategy development is the perceived benefits of having a strategy. The perceived feasibility of developing a strategy given available resources, and trust in their engagement staff were also reasonable predictors of strategy prioritization. Early career respondents and those who said they had previously thought about developing an engagement strategy were also more likely to say they think developing an engagement strategy should be prioritized. The study builds on the strategic communication as planned behavior approach to try to better understand scientists’ communication choices in a way that could support efforts to improve these choices.
more »
« less
Five thoughts about improving science communication as an organizational activity
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe five key lessons learned from a decade of studying how scientists and science communicators think about communication strategy. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on the experience of the researcher and the underlying literatures on strategic communication and science communication. Findings The key argument is that the scientific community needs to put more priority into enabling organizations to plan and implement strategic communication efforts on behalf of science. At present, there is too much reliance on individual communicators. Originality/value The value of this paper is in the degree to which it argues for a more strategic, organization-focused approach to science communication that emphasizes the setting of clear behavioral goals, followed by discussion about what communication objectives might help achieve those goals and the communication tactics needed to achieve the prioritized objectives.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1713197
- PAR ID:
- 10296952
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Communication Management
- Volume:
- 24
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 1363-254X
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 155 to 161
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract If contextual values can play necessary and beneficial roles in scientific research, to what extent should science communicators be transparent about such values? This question is particularly pressing in contexts where there appears to be significant resistance among some non-experts to accept certain scientific claims or adopt science-based policies or recommendations. This paper examines whether value transparency can help promote non-experts’ warranted epistemic trust of experts. I argue that there is a prima facie case in favor of transparency because it can promote four conditions that are thought to be required for epistemic trustworthiness. I then consider three main arguments that transparency about values is likely to be ineffective in promoting such trust (and may undermine it). This analysis shows that while these arguments show that value transparency is not sufficient for promoting epistemic trust, they fail to show that rejecting value transparency as a norm for science communicators is more likely to promote warranted epistemic trust than a qualified norm of value transparency (along with other strategies). Finally, I endorse a tempered understanding of value transparency and consider what this might require in practice.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices enable speech-based communication. However, AAC devices do not support nonverbal communication, which allows people to take turns, regulate conversation dynamics, and express intentions. Nonverbal communication requires motion, which is often challenging for AAC users to produce due to motor constraints. In this work, we explore how socially assistive robots, framed as ''sidekicks,'' might provide augmented communicators (ACs) with a nonverbal channel of communication to support their conversational goals. We developed and conducted an accessible co-design workshop that involved two ACs, their caregivers, and three motion experts. We identified goals for conversational support, co-designed prototypes depicting possible sidekick forms, and enacted different sidekick motions and behaviors to achieve speakers' goals. We contribute guidelines for designing sidekicks that support ACs according to three key parameters: attention, precision, and timing. We show how these parameters manifest in appearance and behavior and how they can guide future designs for augmented nonverbal communication.more » « less
-
The COVID-19 pandemic provides a unique opportunity to study science communication and, in particular, the transmission of consensus. In this study, we show how “science communicators,” writ large to include both mainstream science journalists and practiced conspiracy theorists, transform scientific evidence into two dueling consensuses using the effectiveness of masks as a case study. We do this by compiling one of the largest, hand-coded citation datasets of cross-medium science communication, derived from 5 million Twitter posts of people discussing masks. We find that science communicators selectively uplift certain published works while denigrating others to create bodies of evidence that support and oppose masks, respectively. Anti-mask communicators in particular often use selective and deceptive quotation of scientific work and criticize opposing science more than pro-mask communicators. Our findings have implications for scientists, science communicators, and scientific publishers, whose systems of sharing (and correcting) knowledge are highly vulnerable to what we term adversarial science communication.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Purpose The output of academic literature has increased significantly due to digital technology, presenting researchers with a challenge across every discipline, including materials science, as it is impossible to manually read and extract knowledge from millions of published literature. The purpose of this study is to address this challenge by exploring knowledge extraction in materials science, as applied to digital scholarship. An overriding goal is to help inform readers about the status knowledge extraction in materials science. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a two-part analysis, comparing knowledge extraction methods applied materials science scholarship, across a sample of 22 articles; followed by a comparison of HIVE-4-MAT, an ontology-based knowledge extraction and MatScholar, a named entity recognition (NER) application. This paper covers contextual background, and a review of three tiers of knowledge extraction (ontology-based, NER and relation extraction), followed by the research goals and approach. Findings The results indicate three key needs for researchers to consider for advancing knowledge extraction: the need for materials science focused corpora; the need for researchers to define the scope of the research being pursued, and the need to understand the tradeoffs among different knowledge extraction methods. This paper also points to future material science research potential with relation extraction and increased availability of ontologies. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there are very few studies examining knowledge extraction in materials science. This work makes an important contribution to this underexplored research area.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1108/jcom-03-2020-0022
