Search for: All records

This study initially reports on qualitative interviews (n = 17) with scientists at two Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) sites in the northeastern United States. These interviews suggest the need for greater attention to the role of communication professionals and institutional leadership in fostering high-quality public engagement. The study also reports on a follow-up quantitative survey (n = 68) conducted to better understand the degree to which LTER scientists’ views about communication professionals were meaningfully associated with perceptions about the need for robust engagement funding. The project was initially designed based on the Integrated Behavioral Model to assess how individual LTER scientists’ engagement-related attitudes, normative beliefs, and efficacy beliefs affected their communication activities. However, the combined results highlight the potential value of additional research and theorization aimed at better understanding the factors that might lead to greater cooperation between scientists and organizational communicators. 

This paper is the culmination of several meaning-making activities between an external researcher, PES practitioners, and social scientist researchers who considered the unique contributions that can be made through RPPs on PES (that is, research-practice partnerships on public engagement with science). Based on the experiences from three RPP projects, the group noted that the PES context may be particularly suited to RPPs, and identified the importance of working as thinking-partners who support reciprocal decision-making. Recommendations are made in support of using these approaches to advance practical knowledge-building and reduce shared frustrations about the disconnect between research and practice in PES. 

This paper is the culmination of several meaning-making activities between an external researcher, PES practitioners, and social scientist researchers who considered the unique contributions that can be made through RPPs on PES (that is, research-practice partnerships on public engagement with science). Based on the experiences from three RPP projects, the group noted that the PES context may be particularly suited to RPPs, and identified the importance of working as thinking-partners who support reciprocal decision-making. Recommendations are made in support of using these approaches to advance practical knowledge-building and reduce shared frustrations about the disconnect between research and practice in PES.