• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Nisbet nas interface_draft

Nisbet nas interface_draft



Draft slides for Dec. 8 presentation as part of the National Academies Roundtable on Public Interfaces in the Life Sciences. bit.ly/1fYaBTc #NASInterface

Draft slides for Dec. 8 presentation as part of the National Academies Roundtable on Public Interfaces in the Life Sciences. bit.ly/1fYaBTc #NASInterface



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 45

https://twitter.com 45



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Nisbet nas interface_draft Nisbet nas interface_draft Presentation Transcript

    • Science Communication and Public Engagement: Major Models and Approaches Matthew C. Nisbet Associate Professor School of Communication American University Washington D.C. Sustainable Infrastructures for Life Science Communication National Academies, Washington DC 12.09.13 www.climateshiftproject.org/NASinterface @MCNisbet #NASInterface
    • The Popularization and Dissemination Model  Engages a core audience of science enthusiasts who can comment, share, and repurpose.  Can reach through incidental exposure nonattentive, broader publics.  Can shape the decisions and thinking of policymakers, journalists and funders.  For scientists, can build personal brand, increase citation impact, influence scientific peers, and develop skills and experience. @MCNisbet
    • Popularization & The Cycle of Hype  Emphasis by funding agencies on broader impacts puts pressure on scientists and institutions to “oversell” their findings.  Media coverage emphasizes near term societal benefits and market development with less emphasis on uncertainty and possible risks.  Hype risks credibility and trust in science and may undermine ability to do basic research.  Increasingly defines science and higher education in terms of economic development and job growth. @MCNisbet
    • More Scientific Knowledge = More Disagreement? @MCNisbet
    • More Carl Sagans? Social Identity and Communication @MCNisbet
    • Scientists’ Faulty Intuition: Shared Identity, Information Sources & Assumptions @MCNisbet
    • The Strategic Communication Model Messaging By Audience Segment and By Way of Opinion Leaders @MCNisbet
    • Audience Segmentation, Framing & Opinion Leaders: Climate Change and Biomedical Research @MCNisbet
    • Strategic Communication Campaigns: Frictions and Trade-Offs  Raises questions about conflict of interest and manipulation.  Difficulty coordinating message strategy across groups and organizations.  Often serves to increase polarization and divisions. Increased targeting = increased echo chambers.  Does strategic communication lead to effective policy?  Under what conditions does broader public matter to policymaking?  Defines public as spectators, consumers or voters but not as active participants in decisions. @MCNisbet
    • Public Engagement and Dialogue Model: Deliberative Forums, Public Meetings, Digital News Forums Seeks to “democratize” the governance of science and technology.  Can enhance civic capacity of regions, creating opportunities to debate and collaborate. Can increase participant trust and knowledge, soften group differences and polarization. Informs policy options, adapts knowledge to localized contexts or specialized cases. Questions regarding representativeness and reach, giving visibility to minority views, or criticized as just another “public relations” strategy. @MCNisbet
    • Worldwide Views on Biodiversity @MCNisbet
    • Stakeholder Driven Science and Lay Expertise Model Research that effectively addresses the needs of society requires “co-production” with public. Emphasis on research that is useable, problem solving and socially acceptable; aligning research efforts with national, state or local needs. Promotes enhanced trust, appreciation and support for research institution among public, stakeholders and policymakers. Can be time consuming, resource intensive, “messy,” does not fit easily with traditional collaboration, publication and credit model. @MCNisbet
    • www.ClimateShiftProject.org/NASInterface @MCNisbet