Lunch talk given remotely Oct. 11, 2022 for the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation

1. This material is based upon work supported by the
National Science Foundation (NSF, Grant AISL
1421214-1421723. 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.
Twitter: @Johnbesley
Slides available at SlideShare

2. Today’s behavioral goals:
• We want you to start to mentally differentiate between audience-
specific behavioral goals, communication objectives, and tactics.
• We want to identify improvements our ability to share
our thinking and identify new research ideas/shifts.

3. Underlying our ideas:
• Social science theory
• Surveys (25K+) and interviews (150+) with …
Scientists Trainers Societies Philanthropies Fellowships

4. Why use language of strategy?
• Communicators often lack concrete, audience-specific behavioral “goals”
• An effective strategy is one that achieves goals
• An efficient strategy is one that achieves goals with appropriate resources
• Tactical skills alone* cannot ensure strategic success
*(e.g., clear writing, compelling story-telling, how to listen effectively, etc.)
INSERT APPROPRIATE IMAGE? MAYBE A MESSY KITCHEN? PHOTO OF A
CASE WHERE EXCELLENT TACTICS (TECHNOLOGY) DIDN’T SUCCEED
BECAUSE OF POOR STRATEGY? BETAMAX? GM FOOD? A GREAT MOVIE
THAT NO ONE SAW? MARCH FOR SCIENCE… JUST SORT OF HAPPENED?
ORIENTEERING MAP?
Orienteering by Luigi Mengato, via Flickr Creative Commons

5. Why use the language of social science?
• Sophistication requires conceptual thinking
• Social science theorizes and tests relationships between concepts*
*although there are many concepts with multiple names/terminologies and duplicative theory
Bravo Top Chef Blind
Taste Test Challenge …
Do we know our
ingredients?

6. What do we mean by communication strategy?

7. What do we mean by behavioral goals?
What do you hope will happen in a specific group from the
time, money, and energy you put into communicating?
Behavioral Trust/
Acceptance/Legitimacy
Specific Behavior
Target: “Audiences” Target: Scientists
Willingness to make oneself vulnerable
(e.g., Accept evidence, Share resources)
Donating, Voting, Buying, Career
Choice, etc. [Or consider
information in the context of…]
Willingness to work with specific
audiences; Continuing to interact
Choosing different research
questions/methods
“Two-way communication” is partly about having goals for your own behavior …

8. Challenges: Goal specificity …
I generally want people in this
country to trust scientists
I want this specific group of
people to trust this specific
groups of scientists
I generally want to ensure my
research meets community needs
I want to ensure this specific
project meets the needs of a
specific group
The Marmot, Pasta in Butter and Brent Rostad, Scallop, both via Flickr Creative Commons
Buttered pasta is great,
but … sometimes we
can be more nuanced …
but it’s not required

9. U.S. Congress allocates robust
funding for science
Voters support strong
science funding from
political candidates
Business voices ask for strong
science funding from elected
officials
Constituents ask for strong
science funding from political
elected officials
Business voices support
strong science funding from
political candidates
Political Parties include
support for science funding
in party platforms
Challenges: Goal stacking …
People with science
background seek political
office
Etcetera Etcetera Etcetera Etceter
tcetera
Etcetera
Etcetera Etcetera
Etcetera

10. Who says or does what to/with who
in what way and through what channel?
De-Jargonizer
How accessible is
your work, paste your
article … to analyze
the amount of jargon
in your writing.
What do we mean by tactics?
Clear language
Stories
Dialogue
All tactics

11. Who says or does what to/with who
in what way and through what channel?
De-Jargonizer
How accessible is
your work, paste your
article … to analyze
the amount of jargon
in your writing.
What do we mean by tactics?

12. Objectives are central to strategic communication

13. Fast vs. Slow communication: Fast Communication
Key words:
• Priming
• Heuristics and biases
• Availability
• Representativeness
• WYSIATI
• Cognitive shortcuts
• Nudges
• Choice architecture
• Cognitive misers
• Etc.

14. How do we think slow* communication works?
Over time, communication
that motivates and enables
deeper cognitive
engagement on science
topics should result in
long-term, cumulative
changes to all participants’
(including scientists)
evaluative beliefs
(*Systematic; Central Route, Deliberative, System 2
vs. Heuristic, Peripheral, Automatic , System 1)
Paul Sableman, Dripping via Flickr Creative Commons

15. Communication Objectives as BFFs Objectives:
• Perceptions/Beliefs
• Feelings/Emotions
• Frames
Can be communicated
directly
Goals:
• Desired behaviors
• Behavioral trust
Cannot be communicated
directly and often the
result of multiple
beliefs/feelings/frames

16. “Available research does
not support the claim
that increasing science
literacy will lead to
appreciably greater
support for science ...”
Objectives as the core of evidence-based strategy

17. Fishbein’s “Integrated Behavioral Model”
Fishbein, M. (2009). An integrative model for behavioral prediction and its application to
health promotion. In R. J. DiClemente, R. A. Crosby, & M. C. Kegler (Eds.), Emerging theories in
health promotion practice and research (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Objectives as the core of evidence-based strategy

18. Objectives as the core of evidence-based strategy
Meyer, Davis, & Schoorman’s
Integrative Model of Organizational Trust
(+ Research on Procedural Fairness)
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of
organizational trust. Academy of management review, 20(3), 709-734.
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080335

19. Objectives as the core of evidence-based strategy
Nisbet, M. & Scheufele, D. A. (2007) Framing
science: How should research talk about
science. The Scientist, 21(10), 39-33.
(But based on Gamson and Modigliani)
Nabi, R. L. (2010). The case for
emphasizing discrete emotions in
communication research. Communication
Monographs, 77(2), 153-159.

20. A great thing about focusing
on ‘communication objectives’
Vague: How can we build trust?
Concrete: How can we foster perceptions
of benevolence (i.e., caring, goodwill), in the
context of X?

21. A great thing about focusing
on ‘communication objectives
Vague: What do we know about our X’s attitudes?
Concrete: How can we understand what X believes
about the ecological benefits of X behavior?
“Two-way communication” is partly
about designing communication to
intentionally affect your own
beliefs/feelings/frames …

22. Another great thing about objectives:
From TOG to GOTOG …

23. Where to next?
1. Push yourself and your colleagues to
be concrete about goals and objectives
2. Push social scientists to provide …
• evidence about tactics’ effects on BFFs
• evidence about BFFs’ effects on goal behavior
3. Increase focus on public
engagement infrastructure …
• Being strategic may require help!

24. Bonus content …

25. ?