This poster was used at the AISL PI meeting.

1. .
• Complete surveys, consolidate data and analyze
(multiple presentations and manuscripts planned)
• Project website nearing completion; includes
accessible summaries of key objective research
• New grant submission focused on extending
survey work and building community of trainers
PROJECT GOALS AND RESULTS
CONCEPTUAL UNDERPINNING NEXT STEPS
Acknowledgements
The goal of this project is to understand how
scientists think about public engagement with a
focus on the objectives they see as being achievable
through science communication. This knowledge will
be used to connect and advance science
communication theory and practice.
Year 1 Activities(Fall 2014-Fall 2015) :
• Qualitative interviews with science
communication trainers
• Preparing for online surveys of scientists
from multiple societies
Year 2 Activities (Fall 2015-Fall 2016):
• Online survey of scientists
• Project website development
BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Interviews with science communication trainers
• Completed 24 interviews with trainers
in the US and Canada (~30-45 minutes)
Key findings …
• Trainers believe societal and personal goals
drive scientists engagement activities
• Social goal include either general support for
science or support for specific policy choices
• Journalists focus primarily on skills training
• There appears to be very limited focus on:
(a) setting goals and interim objectives
aimed at achieving those goals; and
(b) talking about the degree to which some
potential objectives may not help reach goals
Conclusions …
• May be worth having discussion about
the role of objective/goal setting in training
• Not clear that the research base linking
engagement activities (e.g., blogging, science
festivaling, etc.) to objectives (e.g., knowledge,
trust, identification, etc.) to goals (e.g., support)
is as accessible to trainers as it needs to be
Example Deliverables
• Presentations at the February 2015 meeting of
the American Association for the Advancement of
Science and the December 2015 meeting of the
Society for Risk Analysis
• Manuscript in revision + short summary is online
Thank you to Sharon Dunwoody, Bruce Lewenstein, and Meena
Selvakumar (advisory panel), as well as Jeanne Braha at AAAS, for
their support and guidance on this work.
This material is based upon work supported by the
National Science Foundation (NSF, Grant AISL
14241214-421723. Any opinions, findings,
conclusions, or recommendations expressed
in this material are those of the authors and
do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.
Surveys of scientists
• 15 minute online surveys of scientists on views
about public engagement and engagement
objectives and goals
Complete/In progress
• American Association for the Advancement of
Science (n = 1,064); American Society for
Microbiology (n = 1,111); American Geophysical
Union (in progress); American Chemical Society
(in progress)
Scheduled for March/April
• Environmental Studies Association, Geological
Society of American; American Society for
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology; American
Political Science Association; science
communication scholars (based on publications)
Example Deliverables
• Presentation at the February 2016 meeting of
the American Association for the Advancement of
Science; additional presentations planned
34
45
58
59
13
19
14
5
30
25
19
14
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Face-to-Face
Media
Direct
Online
Never Once 2-5 times 6-11 times About once a month Multiple times per month Once a week or more
“To start, about how often have you engaged with the public on science in the last year?”
Example survey results
from Fall 2015 AAAS Survey
(n = 1,064)
• Objectives and goals included in
interviews and surveys were
identified by a literature review, and
discussing with the science
communication research and
training communities
• Survey is based on adaption of the
Theory of Planned Behavior
• Scientists asked about attitudes
toward objectives, perceived
norms associated with objectives,
and efficacy beliefs related
to objectives
• Detailed demographic and
career data also collected
• Initial analyses suggests all
TPB variables are associated
with objective prioritization