Download to read offline
![Strategic Science
Communication:
A Social Scientific
Approach to Effective
Public Engagement
John C. Besley
Ellis N. Brandt Professor
Communication Arts and Sciences
Michigan State University
[w/Anthony Dudo, The University of Texas, Austin]
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.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/2022-nihyoungscientists-220301191959/75/2022-Talk-for-for-NIH-Office-of-AIDS-Research-and-Sexual-Gender-and-Minority-Research-Office-Post-Bac-SciComm-Fellows-1-2048.jpg)
![What do we mean by behavioral goals?
What do you hope will happen from the time,
money, and energy you put into communicating?
Behavioral Trust/
Legitimacy/Acceptance
Specific Behavior
Target: “Audiences” Target: Scientists
Making oneself vulnerable (Not
protesting; Putting attention
elsewhere; Continuing to interact)
[Consider information in the
context of …] Donating; Voting;
Buying; Career choosing, etc.
Willingness to work with specific
audiences; Continuing to interact
Choosing different research
questions; Choosing different
research approaches/methods](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/2022-nihyoungscientists-220301191959/75/2022-Talk-for-for-NIH-Office-of-AIDS-Research-and-Sexual-Gender-and-Minority-Research-Office-Post-Bac-SciComm-Fellows-3-2048.jpg)
![“Available research does
not support the claim that
increasing science literacy will
lead to appreciably greater
support for science ...”
The fundamental challenge
of science communication
[So what can we do?]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/2022-nihyoungscientists-220301191959/75/2022-Talk-for-for-NIH-Office-of-AIDS-Research-and-Sexual-Gender-and-Minority-Research-Office-Post-Bac-SciComm-Fellows-11-2048.jpg)
Uploaded byJohn C. Besley
2022 Talk for for NIH Office of AIDS Research and Sexual Gender and Minority Research Office Post-Bac SciComm Fellows
The document discusses strategic science communication with a focus on effectively engaging the public and the importance of setting specific behavioral goals and communication objectives. It emphasizes the need for sophistication in communication tactics, considering factors like trust, emotions, and framing to foster deeper cognitive engagement over time. It provides insights into the challenges of science communication and suggests methods for improving public understanding and engagement with scientific issues.
More Related Content
Similar to 2022 Talk for for NIH Office of AIDS Research and Sexual Gender and Minority Research Office Post-Bac SciComm Fellows
2022 Talk for for NIH Office of AIDS Research and Sexual Gender and Minority Research Office Post-Bac SciComm Fellows
- 1. Strategic Science Communication: A SocialScientific Approach to Effective Public Engagement John C. Besley Ellis N. Brandt Professor Communication Arts and Sciences Michigan State University [w/Anthony Dudo, The University of Texas, Austin] 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.
- 2. What do wemean by strategic and effective? Behavioral Goals Communication Objectives Tactics
- 3. What do wemean by behavioral goals? What do you hope will happen from the time, money, and energy you put into communicating? Behavioral Trust/ Legitimacy/Acceptance Specific Behavior Target: “Audiences” Target: Scientists Making oneself vulnerable (Not protesting; Putting attention elsewhere; Continuing to interact) [Consider information in the context of …] Donating; Voting; Buying; Career choosing, etc. Willingness to work with specific audiences; Continuing to interact Choosing different research questions; Choosing different research approaches/methods
- 4. A frequent sciencecommunication conversation JCB: What’s your goal? Communicator: “We want to decrease misunderstandings about ______?” Coming soon Why do you want to decrease misunderstandings? What do you think will happen if you succeed? Coming soon (The goal questions) (The objectives questions)
- 5. Goal specificity … Igenerally 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 people in this country to consider environmental risks when making decisions I want this specific group of people to include these specific environmental considerations into that specific decision 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
- 6. Other behaviors byspecific groups that might make funding more likely? 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 Goal stacking … (i.e., integrated campaigns) Etc. People with science background seek political office
- 7. What do wemean by tactics? 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. Most training … Emphasis on ‘translation,’ storytelling, new social channels, and fostering dialogue (+ more)
- 8. What about communicationobjectives?
- 9. Fast vs. Slowcommunication: Fast Communication Key words: • Priming • Heuristics and biases • Availability • Representativeness • WYSIATI • Cognitive shortcuts • Nudges • Choice architecture • Cognitive misers • Etc.
- 10. How do wethink slow (systematic) communication works? Over time, efforts to foster deeper cognitive engagement on science topics should result in long-term, cumulative changes to all communication participants’ (including scientists) evaluative beliefs Attitudes are the (weighted?) sum of available/salient beliefs (b) and the evaluation (e) of those beliefs Paul Sableman, Dripping via Flickr Creative Commons
- 11. “Available research does notsupport the claim that increasing science literacy will lead to appreciably greater support for science ...” The fundamental challenge of science communication [So what can we do?]
- 12. Communication objectives ascore of effectiveness
- 13. Audience Specific Behavioral Goals= Dish • Outcome of many factors (cannot be achieved directly) • Chosen based on priorities Communication Objectives = Ingredients • Beliefs, feelings, frames (+salience) • Direct effect of communication • Chosen based on goals/context
- 14. Knowing how touse more ingredients (objectives) in more interesting ways (tactics) means being a more sophisticated communicator
- 15. Four Areas ofTheory and Research That all Public Health Communicators Should Know (?) Paul Sableman, Dripping via Flickr Creative Commons 1. Trust and Trustworthiness: Integrative Model of Organizational Trust 2. Behavior Change: Theory of Planned Behavior/Integrated Behavioral Model 3. Emotions: Theories of Discrete Emotions 4. Framing: Sociological vs. psychological framing
- 16. Communication objectives ascore of effectiveness 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
- 17. The great thingabout a focus on ‘communication objectives Vague Option 1: How can we foster trust Concrete Option 2: How can we foster perceptions (i.e., pre-beliefs) of benevolence (i.e., caring), etc.
- 18. Communication objectives ascore of effectiveness 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.
- 19. Communication objectives ascore of effectiveness Theories of discrete emotions
- 20. Communication objectives ascore of effectiveness Nisbet and Scheufele’s Frame Typology (based on research by Gamson and Modigliani) Nisbet, M. & Scheufele, D. A. (2007) Framing science: How should research talk about science. The Scientist, 21(10), 39-33/ Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989, Jul). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1-37.
- 21. A frequent sciencecommunication conversation JCB: What’s your goal? Communicator: “We want to decrease misunderstandings about ______?” What types of misunderstandings? Cause/effect? Risks/ benefits? Norms? Efficacy? Something about the people involved? Why do you want to decrease misunderstandings? What do you think will happen if you succeed? Why frame in terms of misunderstandings? What might you want people to believe and feel about the issues and people involved? How do you want to frame? (The goal questions) (The objectives questions)
- 22. Communication objectives ascore of effectiveness
Editor's Notes
- #4 Focus on making defining goals in terms of behaviors/pseudo-behaviors (such as grudging acceptance?)
- #5 Could also add a slide about the fact that good communication is hard and we need a community of practitioners to help do it; we can’t expect individual scientists to carry the burden on their own.
- #6 Focus on making defining goals in terms of behaviors/pseudo-behaviors (such as grudging acceptance?)
- #7 Focus on making defining goals in terms of behaviors/pseudo-behaviors (such as grudging acceptance?)
- #8 Emphasize that tactics are what most trainers/training books focus Note idea that you can be a really skilled tactician (clear? Vivid?) but focus on the wrong things (just explain science/results).
- #10 Note … this slide suggests a reconceptualization of public engagement activities as tactics aimed at fostering system 2/systematic/central route processing by all participants. The key is that things like dialogue are great at fostering the motivation to process and that plain language is great at fostering the ability to process. Beliefs are not just beliefs about science, but also beliefs about others … Also important to note that scientists’ beliefs, feelings, and frames should change if the engagement tactic is appropriately designed and the scientist is being reflective.
- #11 Note … this slide suggests a reconceptualization of public engagement activities as tactics aimed at fostering system 2/systematic/central route processing by all participants. The key is that things like dialogue are great at fostering the motivation to process and that plain language is great at fostering the ability to process. Beliefs are not just beliefs about science, but also beliefs about others … Also important to note that scientists’ beliefs, feelings, and frames should change if the engagement tactic is appropriately designed and the scientist is being reflective.
- #12 Key idea is deficit model thinking as a over reliance on one limited pathway towards behavior change …
- #16 Note … this slide suggests a reconceptualization of public engagement activities as tactics aimed at fostering system 2/systematic/central route processing by all participants. The key is that things like dialogue are great at fostering the motivation to process and that plain language is great at fostering the ability to process. Beliefs are not just beliefs about science, but also beliefs about others … Also important to note that scientists’ beliefs, feelings, and frames should change if the engagement tactic is appropriately designed and the scientist is being reflective.
- #22 Could also add a slide about the fact that good communication is hard and we need a community of practitioners to help do it; we can’t expect individual scientists to carry the burden on their own.