Scientists prioritize certain objectives and goals over others when engaging in public communication. The top priorities include informing and educating the public about scientific issues, generating interest and excitement about science, and defending science against falsehoods. However, simply increasing science literacy and knowledge may have limited impact, and scientists are often seen as competent but cold. More emphasis could be placed on objectives like showing the public that scientists care about society and are open and transparent. The effectiveness of different engagement tactics also requires further research.
China 2016; Being strategic in science communicationJohn C. Besley
Presentation delivered at Nanjing Agricultural University in May 2016. Provides overview of how we have been thinking about science communication as strategic behavior (based on previous presentations and NSF grant)
China 2016: Overview of public opinion about science with a special focus on ...John C. Besley
This document summarizes key findings from the 2016 Science and Engineering Indicators report on U.S. and global public opinion regarding science and technology issues. It finds that Americans have a moderate level of interest in science and a basic level of factual knowledge. Overall attitudes toward science are positive, though views on specific issues like genetic engineering and nuclear energy are more mixed and have declined slightly. The document analyzes factors influencing public opinions on various technologies, finding that demographics play a minor role while perceptions of scientific processes and trust in scientists have a stronger influence on attitudes.
Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST) meeting presentation - ...John C. Besley
Draft results of 2015-2016 scientist surveys with discussion focused on comparisons between societies. More complete analysis to follow. Check against delivery.
Briefing presentation provided at Nanjing Agricultural University on what to think about when considering publishing in science communication-related journals listed in the Social Science citation Index.
The document summarizes key findings from the 2011 Public Attitudes to Science study in the UK. It found that while most of the public values science and sees its benefits, some remain concerned about regulation of scientists and potential negative consequences. Segmentation analysis identified groups with different levels of engagement, from "Confident Engagers" who are already highly engaged to "Indifferent" who are least engaged. Effective communication requires understanding these groups and their preferences to build understanding and trust in science.
This document discusses several ethical considerations for research involving human participants. It raises questions about informed consent, costs and benefits to participants, and privacy. The key principles are that participants must provide informed consent, having been told the purpose and procedures of the research, their right to not participate or withdraw, and potential benefits. Researchers must consider external codes and laws, risks to participants, and the consequences of the research for individuals and society. The Seedhouse Ethical Grid is presented as a tool to help structure ethical analysis in research.
Understanding Attitudes to Science: Reviewing Public Attitudes ResearchMarilyn Booth
This document summarizes a review of public attitudes towards science based on previous survey research from 2000, 2005, and 2008. It discusses key findings around public understanding and awareness of science, perceptions of scientific research, trust in research findings and scientific institutions. It also provides implications for improving questions and scope in the next public attitudes survey in 2011.
2014 254102 Professional and Ethical Practice writing workshop 1Martin McMorrow
This presentation is designed for students enrolled in the Ethical and Professional Practice paper [254.102] at Massey University, New Zealand. It highlights key issues related to writing the first assignment in the course.
China 2016; Being strategic in science communicationJohn C. Besley
Presentation delivered at Nanjing Agricultural University in May 2016. Provides overview of how we have been thinking about science communication as strategic behavior (based on previous presentations and NSF grant)
China 2016: Overview of public opinion about science with a special focus on ...John C. Besley
This document summarizes key findings from the 2016 Science and Engineering Indicators report on U.S. and global public opinion regarding science and technology issues. It finds that Americans have a moderate level of interest in science and a basic level of factual knowledge. Overall attitudes toward science are positive, though views on specific issues like genetic engineering and nuclear energy are more mixed and have declined slightly. The document analyzes factors influencing public opinions on various technologies, finding that demographics play a minor role while perceptions of scientific processes and trust in scientists have a stronger influence on attitudes.
Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST) meeting presentation - ...John C. Besley
Draft results of 2015-2016 scientist surveys with discussion focused on comparisons between societies. More complete analysis to follow. Check against delivery.
Briefing presentation provided at Nanjing Agricultural University on what to think about when considering publishing in science communication-related journals listed in the Social Science citation Index.
The document summarizes key findings from the 2011 Public Attitudes to Science study in the UK. It found that while most of the public values science and sees its benefits, some remain concerned about regulation of scientists and potential negative consequences. Segmentation analysis identified groups with different levels of engagement, from "Confident Engagers" who are already highly engaged to "Indifferent" who are least engaged. Effective communication requires understanding these groups and their preferences to build understanding and trust in science.
This document discusses several ethical considerations for research involving human participants. It raises questions about informed consent, costs and benefits to participants, and privacy. The key principles are that participants must provide informed consent, having been told the purpose and procedures of the research, their right to not participate or withdraw, and potential benefits. Researchers must consider external codes and laws, risks to participants, and the consequences of the research for individuals and society. The Seedhouse Ethical Grid is presented as a tool to help structure ethical analysis in research.
Understanding Attitudes to Science: Reviewing Public Attitudes ResearchMarilyn Booth
This document summarizes a review of public attitudes towards science based on previous survey research from 2000, 2005, and 2008. It discusses key findings around public understanding and awareness of science, perceptions of scientific research, trust in research findings and scientific institutions. It also provides implications for improving questions and scope in the next public attitudes survey in 2011.
2014 254102 Professional and Ethical Practice writing workshop 1Martin McMorrow
This presentation is designed for students enrolled in the Ethical and Professional Practice paper [254.102] at Massey University, New Zealand. It highlights key issues related to writing the first assignment in the course.
This is an updated version of an invited talk I presented at the European Research Council-Brussels (Scientific Seminar): "Love for Science or 'academic prostitution'".
It has been updated to be presented at the The Spanish and Portuguese Relativity Meetings (EREP) on 6th July 2019.
I have included new slides and revised others.
I present a personal revision (sometimes my own vision) of some issues that I consider key for doing Science. It was at the time focused on the expected audience, mainly Scientific Officers with background in different fields of science and scholarship, but also Agency staff.
Abstract: In a recent Special issue of Nature concerning Science Metrics it was claimed that " Research reverts to a kind of 'academic prostitution' in which work is done to please editors and referees rather than to further knowledge."If this is true, funding agencies should try to avoid falling into the trap of their own system. By perpetuating this 'prostitution' they risk not funding the best research but funding the best sold research.
Given the current epoch of economical crisis, where in a quest for funds researchers are forced into competitive game of pandering to panelists, its seems a good time for deep reflection about the entire scientific system.
With this talk I aim to provoke extra critical thinking among the committees who select evaluators, and among the evaluators, who in turn require critical thinking to the candidates when selecting excellent science.
I present some initiatives (e.g. new tracers of impact for the Web era- 'altmetrics'), and on-going projects (e.g. how to move from publishing advertising to publishing knowledge), that might enable us to favor Science over marketing.
This document outlines the key concepts from Chapter 2 of the textbook "Asking and Answering Sociological Questions". It discusses how sociology differs from natural sciences in its study of human subjects. The research process in sociology involves 8 stages: defining problems, reviewing evidence, formulating hypotheses, designing studies, collecting data, interpreting results, reporting findings, and repeating the process. Sociologists explore factual, comparative, developmental, and theoretical questions using methods like ethnography, surveys, experiments, and comparative research.
The document discusses the evolution of research from its origins in seeking knowledge to its modern definitions and processes. It traces the etymology of the word "research" from French terms meaning "to go about seeking." Research is now defined as systematic, creative work to increase knowledge. Key developments include agricultural practices, industrialization, disease remedies, and technology. Research has also evolved from original investigations to include scientific, empirical, and qualitative methods. Current research design employs quantitative and qualitative approaches like surveys and interviews.
A good research question is the most important element of any research paper. How can you come up with an interesting and meaningful research question? This SlideShare will give you step-by-step guidelines along with the explanation of some basic concepts you should consider while defining your research question. Moreover, it will hand you with some tests such as PICOT, PESICO, and FINER, which will give you a structured method to frame your question. Thus, you will be equipped to put your hypothesis on paper confidently.
This document summarizes a webinar about scientific research. It covers 5 stations:
[1] The essence of scientific research, including defining it and discussing its purpose.
[2] Looking at the past, present and future of scientific research, highlighting contributions from ancient Egypt, Greece, Muslim scholars and more recent Western scientists.
[3] Discussing 10 things people should know about scientific research, like it being a learnable skill and emphasizing innovation, collaboration and ethics.
[4] Covering 10 things people should do, like discovering your passion and making a plan.
[5] The conclusion emphasizes that every mind can make a difference in building the country's scientific and
The document discusses critical thinking and its application to ethics and bioethics. It defines critical thinking as the identification and evaluation of evidence to guide decision making. When applying critical thinking to ethics and bioethics, there may not be a single right answer and individuals' values and premises must be acknowledged. Various models for teaching critical thinking in ethics and bioethics are presented, including mapping out issues, stakeholders, values and reasoning. An example on using aborted female fetuses as a source of eggs for fertility treatment is provided to demonstrate applying critical thinking.
The document discusses how scientists choose their methods for investigations. Scientists plan methods to address specific problems, relying on available tools while being creative in their use. The type of work, whether experiments or fieldwork, depends on the subject being studied. Experiments allow controlling of variables while fieldwork involves observation of natural systems. A large part of scientific work involves understanding the variables at play.
This document provides an overview of the scientific method and importance of research skills. It discusses how human knowledge is often flawed and unscientific, developing through guesses and speculation rather than scientific evidence. It then covers the scientific method, which involves generating hypotheses based on initial observations and theories, then collecting data to test the theories. The document outlines the key stages of the scientific method and importance of validity, reliability and analyzing data to make inferences beyond the sample. Finally, it discusses discussing the implications of findings and how they can inform future research directions.
This document provides an introduction to research methods for graduate students at Addis Ababa University. It discusses key concepts like the difference between common sense knowledge and scientific knowledge. There are different ways of knowing, such as using senses, opinions of others, and prevailing beliefs. However, these everyday sources of knowledge are not always reliable. Scientific research provides a more systematic approach to gaining knowledge through planned observations and experiments. The document outlines the research process and different types of research like basic vs applied research. It emphasizes that research should be conducted ethically and findings should be reported objectively. The goal is to prepare students to conduct rigorous scientific research and contribute new knowledge to their fields of study.
Presentation to CRC Mental Health Early Career Researcher Workshop, Melbourne 29.11.17 for @andsdata.
Workshop title: A by-product of scientific training: We're all a little bit biased.
AAAS Presentation on Scientists' Views about EngagmentJohn C. Besley
This presentation is to be delivered on Feb. 14 at the annual meeting of the AAAS. It reports research supported by the NSF's Advancing Informal Science Learning group (see disclaimer in presentation).
Research ethics and problems encountred by reseachers ErTARUNKASHNI
Definition of research ethics
Objective of research ethics
Importance of research ethics
Principles of research ethics
Do’s and don'ts of research ethics
Problems encountered by researchers
This document provides an overview of research, what to expect, and how to prepare. It defines research as the pursuit of new knowledge through discovery and systematic experimentation. There are two main types: basic research which increases fundamental knowledge without a direct application, and applied research which focuses on developing applications. At the M.Pharm level, students work with a supervisor to define a research problem, aims, objectives and methodology. Benefits of research include learning concepts, developing job skills, and preparing for future careers in academia or industry. Challenges may include effective time management, differing work styles within teams, dealing with failed experiments, and understanding that research questions are ongoing.
Here are 3 observations and an inference for each set of animal tracks:
Set 1:
Observations:
1. There are 4 toe prints in each track.
2. The prints form a line with space between each set.
3. The prints are rounded with claw marks.
Inference: Based on the observations, I infer these tracks were made by a dog or wolf.
Set 2:
Observations:
1. There are 3 long toe prints in each track.
2. The prints form a staggered line with one print in front of the other.
3. The prints are elongated with no claw marks.
Inference: Based on the observations, I infer these tracks were
Research is defined as a systematic process of collecting and analyzing information to increase understanding of a phenomenon. It originates with a question or problem and requires a clear goal and specific plan or procedure. This often involves dividing the main problem into subproblems. Research is guided by a specific problem or hypothesis and requires collecting and interpreting data. It allows one to pursue interests and learn new things while developing problem-solving skills.
AAAS 2016: Key Findings from NSB Science and Engineering Indicators 2016, Cha...John C. Besley
This presentation reports on key findings from the National Science Board's biennial chapter on public attitudes and understanding about S&T as presented in Science and Engineering Indicators. Views presented are those of the author and not necessarily those of the NSB.
This document is an application for a professional development trip organized as a 1-credit course. It requests the applicant's name, NetID, major/minor, GPA, class standing, expected graduation date, and preferred trip location. The applicant must confirm their understanding that they must attend all pre-trip classes and on-site activities, complete assignments, register and pay tuition by the deadline, pay all travel expenses, and that all information provided is true. The deadline to submit the application is May 1st.
China 2016: My understanding of the history of quantitative science communic...John C. Besley
Presentation given at Nanjing Agriculture University, May 2016. Provides an initial overview of how I think about the field with a focus on the central role of agricultural university and increasing interest in the face of the challenge of issues such as climate change and various emerging technologies that the public sees as potentially risky.
AAAS S&E indicators Chapter 7 Overview Presentation: Public Attitudes and Und...John C. Besley
Presentation by John C. Besley at the 2014 Meeting of the AAAS. Focus was key results from Chapter 7 of the 2014 Science and Engineering Indicators. Besley was the lead author of the chapter, although the views expressed in the presentation are his own and not necessarily those of the National Science Foundation or the National Science Board.
This is an updated version of an invited talk I presented at the European Research Council-Brussels (Scientific Seminar): "Love for Science or 'academic prostitution'".
It has been updated to be presented at the The Spanish and Portuguese Relativity Meetings (EREP) on 6th July 2019.
I have included new slides and revised others.
I present a personal revision (sometimes my own vision) of some issues that I consider key for doing Science. It was at the time focused on the expected audience, mainly Scientific Officers with background in different fields of science and scholarship, but also Agency staff.
Abstract: In a recent Special issue of Nature concerning Science Metrics it was claimed that " Research reverts to a kind of 'academic prostitution' in which work is done to please editors and referees rather than to further knowledge."If this is true, funding agencies should try to avoid falling into the trap of their own system. By perpetuating this 'prostitution' they risk not funding the best research but funding the best sold research.
Given the current epoch of economical crisis, where in a quest for funds researchers are forced into competitive game of pandering to panelists, its seems a good time for deep reflection about the entire scientific system.
With this talk I aim to provoke extra critical thinking among the committees who select evaluators, and among the evaluators, who in turn require critical thinking to the candidates when selecting excellent science.
I present some initiatives (e.g. new tracers of impact for the Web era- 'altmetrics'), and on-going projects (e.g. how to move from publishing advertising to publishing knowledge), that might enable us to favor Science over marketing.
This document outlines the key concepts from Chapter 2 of the textbook "Asking and Answering Sociological Questions". It discusses how sociology differs from natural sciences in its study of human subjects. The research process in sociology involves 8 stages: defining problems, reviewing evidence, formulating hypotheses, designing studies, collecting data, interpreting results, reporting findings, and repeating the process. Sociologists explore factual, comparative, developmental, and theoretical questions using methods like ethnography, surveys, experiments, and comparative research.
The document discusses the evolution of research from its origins in seeking knowledge to its modern definitions and processes. It traces the etymology of the word "research" from French terms meaning "to go about seeking." Research is now defined as systematic, creative work to increase knowledge. Key developments include agricultural practices, industrialization, disease remedies, and technology. Research has also evolved from original investigations to include scientific, empirical, and qualitative methods. Current research design employs quantitative and qualitative approaches like surveys and interviews.
A good research question is the most important element of any research paper. How can you come up with an interesting and meaningful research question? This SlideShare will give you step-by-step guidelines along with the explanation of some basic concepts you should consider while defining your research question. Moreover, it will hand you with some tests such as PICOT, PESICO, and FINER, which will give you a structured method to frame your question. Thus, you will be equipped to put your hypothesis on paper confidently.
This document summarizes a webinar about scientific research. It covers 5 stations:
[1] The essence of scientific research, including defining it and discussing its purpose.
[2] Looking at the past, present and future of scientific research, highlighting contributions from ancient Egypt, Greece, Muslim scholars and more recent Western scientists.
[3] Discussing 10 things people should know about scientific research, like it being a learnable skill and emphasizing innovation, collaboration and ethics.
[4] Covering 10 things people should do, like discovering your passion and making a plan.
[5] The conclusion emphasizes that every mind can make a difference in building the country's scientific and
The document discusses critical thinking and its application to ethics and bioethics. It defines critical thinking as the identification and evaluation of evidence to guide decision making. When applying critical thinking to ethics and bioethics, there may not be a single right answer and individuals' values and premises must be acknowledged. Various models for teaching critical thinking in ethics and bioethics are presented, including mapping out issues, stakeholders, values and reasoning. An example on using aborted female fetuses as a source of eggs for fertility treatment is provided to demonstrate applying critical thinking.
The document discusses how scientists choose their methods for investigations. Scientists plan methods to address specific problems, relying on available tools while being creative in their use. The type of work, whether experiments or fieldwork, depends on the subject being studied. Experiments allow controlling of variables while fieldwork involves observation of natural systems. A large part of scientific work involves understanding the variables at play.
This document provides an overview of the scientific method and importance of research skills. It discusses how human knowledge is often flawed and unscientific, developing through guesses and speculation rather than scientific evidence. It then covers the scientific method, which involves generating hypotheses based on initial observations and theories, then collecting data to test the theories. The document outlines the key stages of the scientific method and importance of validity, reliability and analyzing data to make inferences beyond the sample. Finally, it discusses discussing the implications of findings and how they can inform future research directions.
This document provides an introduction to research methods for graduate students at Addis Ababa University. It discusses key concepts like the difference between common sense knowledge and scientific knowledge. There are different ways of knowing, such as using senses, opinions of others, and prevailing beliefs. However, these everyday sources of knowledge are not always reliable. Scientific research provides a more systematic approach to gaining knowledge through planned observations and experiments. The document outlines the research process and different types of research like basic vs applied research. It emphasizes that research should be conducted ethically and findings should be reported objectively. The goal is to prepare students to conduct rigorous scientific research and contribute new knowledge to their fields of study.
Presentation to CRC Mental Health Early Career Researcher Workshop, Melbourne 29.11.17 for @andsdata.
Workshop title: A by-product of scientific training: We're all a little bit biased.
AAAS Presentation on Scientists' Views about EngagmentJohn C. Besley
This presentation is to be delivered on Feb. 14 at the annual meeting of the AAAS. It reports research supported by the NSF's Advancing Informal Science Learning group (see disclaimer in presentation).
Research ethics and problems encountred by reseachers ErTARUNKASHNI
Definition of research ethics
Objective of research ethics
Importance of research ethics
Principles of research ethics
Do’s and don'ts of research ethics
Problems encountered by researchers
This document provides an overview of research, what to expect, and how to prepare. It defines research as the pursuit of new knowledge through discovery and systematic experimentation. There are two main types: basic research which increases fundamental knowledge without a direct application, and applied research which focuses on developing applications. At the M.Pharm level, students work with a supervisor to define a research problem, aims, objectives and methodology. Benefits of research include learning concepts, developing job skills, and preparing for future careers in academia or industry. Challenges may include effective time management, differing work styles within teams, dealing with failed experiments, and understanding that research questions are ongoing.
Here are 3 observations and an inference for each set of animal tracks:
Set 1:
Observations:
1. There are 4 toe prints in each track.
2. The prints form a line with space between each set.
3. The prints are rounded with claw marks.
Inference: Based on the observations, I infer these tracks were made by a dog or wolf.
Set 2:
Observations:
1. There are 3 long toe prints in each track.
2. The prints form a staggered line with one print in front of the other.
3. The prints are elongated with no claw marks.
Inference: Based on the observations, I infer these tracks were
Research is defined as a systematic process of collecting and analyzing information to increase understanding of a phenomenon. It originates with a question or problem and requires a clear goal and specific plan or procedure. This often involves dividing the main problem into subproblems. Research is guided by a specific problem or hypothesis and requires collecting and interpreting data. It allows one to pursue interests and learn new things while developing problem-solving skills.
AAAS 2016: Key Findings from NSB Science and Engineering Indicators 2016, Cha...John C. Besley
This presentation reports on key findings from the National Science Board's biennial chapter on public attitudes and understanding about S&T as presented in Science and Engineering Indicators. Views presented are those of the author and not necessarily those of the NSB.
This document is an application for a professional development trip organized as a 1-credit course. It requests the applicant's name, NetID, major/minor, GPA, class standing, expected graduation date, and preferred trip location. The applicant must confirm their understanding that they must attend all pre-trip classes and on-site activities, complete assignments, register and pay tuition by the deadline, pay all travel expenses, and that all information provided is true. The deadline to submit the application is May 1st.
China 2016: My understanding of the history of quantitative science communic...John C. Besley
Presentation given at Nanjing Agriculture University, May 2016. Provides an initial overview of how I think about the field with a focus on the central role of agricultural university and increasing interest in the face of the challenge of issues such as climate change and various emerging technologies that the public sees as potentially risky.
AAAS S&E indicators Chapter 7 Overview Presentation: Public Attitudes and Und...John C. Besley
Presentation by John C. Besley at the 2014 Meeting of the AAAS. Focus was key results from Chapter 7 of the 2014 Science and Engineering Indicators. Besley was the lead author of the chapter, although the views expressed in the presentation are his own and not necessarily those of the National Science Foundation or the National Science Board.
Sra 2014 presentation engagement goals and engagementJohn C. Besley
1) Scientists' perceptions and goals related to online public engagement were examined through a survey of 390 scientists.
2) The highest priority goals for scientists were correcting misinformation and defending science, while the lowest priority was building trust.
3) Past online engagement experience was the strongest predictor of willingness to engage online in the future, followed by perceived self-efficacy in achieving engagement goals. Older scientists were less willing to engage.
Strategic science communication (Short Version): Delivered in Stellenbosch Se...John C. Besley
This is a shortened version of a talk I've prepared on science communication goals and objectives. I'll continue to update the presentation over time and appreciate the opportunity to talk about the ideas contained.
This document summarizes research on scientists' communication behavior and willingness to engage with the public. Key findings include:
- Scientists have negative views of the public and media, but want to be helpful. They lack training in public engagement.
- Willingness to engage online is predicted by younger age, higher efficacy beliefs, and a desire to contribute to debates.
- Defending science against misinformation is scientists' top priority for online engagement goals. Prioritizing strategic goals depends on attitudes, norms, and efficacy related to those goals.
Overview of nuclear energy attitudes in the U.S.John C. Besley
This document summarizes public opinion polls and academic research on views toward nuclear energy in the United States. It finds that support for nuclear energy has declined somewhat since 2005 but has stabilized in recent years around 40-45%. Older, white, educated males are more likely to support nuclear energy. Key factors influencing views include perceptions of risks from accidents and waste storage, as well as trust in operators and regulators. Academic research suggests attitudes are shaped mostly by issue-specific concerns like health risks and waste storage rather than broader ideological views.
This document discusses what science is and is not. It begins by stating that science attempts to disprove ideas rather than prove them, and is concerned with understanding the natural world through observation and experimentation. It notes several misconceptions, such as the idea that science can prove anything or that there is a linear progression from hypothesis to theory to law. Good science minimizes bias through random sampling, appropriate measurement techniques, and independent verification. It emphasizes that science provides the most reliable knowledge about the natural world but does not claim certainty, only degrees of probability. Overall, the document provides a concise overview of the scientific process and addresses common misconceptions about the limitations and objectives of science.
The document discusses key aspects of science:
1. Science aims to understand the natural world through observation and testing of hypotheses, not to prove ideas.
2. Objectivity is important to good science - experiments must be designed to minimize bias.
3. Two main types of bias are sampling bias, from an unrepresentative sample, and measurement bias, from an inaccurate measurement method.
4. The scientific community uses independent verification of results and peer review to reduce bias in published findings.
The document discusses key aspects of science:
1. Science aims to understand the natural world through observation and testing of hypotheses, not to prove ideas.
2. Objectivity is important to good science - experiments must be designed to minimize bias.
3. Two main types of bias are sampling bias, from an unrepresentative sample, and measurement bias, from an inaccurate measurement method.
4. The scientific community uses independent verification of results and peer review to reduce bias in published findings.
The document discusses identifying bias in scientific studies. It states that good science minimizes bias through random sampling, minimizing measurement bias, and having a large enough sample size. Bias can influence results and different scientists may find different solutions to the same problem. The scientific community engages in quality control like independent duplication of studies and peer review to eliminate bias. Results are more reliable if verified through these methods.
The document discusses identifying bias in scientific studies. It states that good science minimizes bias through random sampling, minimizing measurement bias, and accounting for multiple factors. Bias can come from the language used, data reported, and source of the data. The scientific community engages in quality control like independent duplication of results and peer review to eliminate bias.
A primary goal of mental health education is to increase awareness. This involves teaching children what mental health means, and how to maintain positive mental health. It is vital that youth understand the concept of self-care and that they are responsible for their own mental health.
This document provides information about how sociologists conduct research, including the steps they take to decide what to study, collect data, and analyze their findings. It discusses 1) how sociologists choose research topics based on their interests, current debates, and practical considerations like time and funding, 2) common methods for collecting data such as questionnaires, interviews, observations, case studies and longitudinal studies, and 3) important considerations for sociologists in collecting a sample and ensuring it is representative of the overall population. The document also defines key terms and concepts in sociological research.
Sociologists follow several steps when deciding what to research:
1. They choose a topic influenced by their interests, current debates, and practical issues like time and resources.
2. They read previous research on the topic.
3. They form a hypothesis or research question to focus the study.
4. They prepare a research design which may involve collecting primary or secondary data using various methods like surveys, observation, existing statistics, and documents. Sample selection is important to make generalizations about the overall population.
Research is a systematic investigation to discover new information or verify existing facts. It involves collecting data through objective analysis and experiments. The goals of research are to discover new facts, verify existing knowledge, analyze relationships, and develop new theories. People conduct research for various motivations such as obtaining an advanced degree, solving problems, gaining recognition, or satisfying curiosity. Research is important for advancing knowledge in many fields like science, technology, medicine, and social sciences. It provides solutions to problems and guidelines for government policies. Choosing appropriate research methods and methodology is essential for effectively planning and conducting research.
This document discusses key aspects of conducting research, including:
1) Research is defined as a careful, systematic investigation or experimentation aimed at discovering facts or interpreting theories. Basic research skills are important but are often overlooked in many educational systems.
2) Characteristics of good research include being empirical, logical, cyclical, analytical, replicable, critical, universal, and systematic. Ethical guidelines for researchers include honesty, objectivity, integrity, and respecting intellectual property.
3) The typical steps in conducting research are identifying a problem, formulating objectives, developing a framework, designing methodology, analyzing data, presenting conclusions, and taking action. Research can be qualitative or quantitative.
SRA 2016: Do Scientists who Study 'Risky' Topic Communicate MoreJohn C. Besley
Presentation analyzed data from scientists from across a range of scientific societies to assess the degree to which scientists' beliefs about the public's risk perceptions are associated with scientists' with past communication behavior, willingness to communicate, communication objectives, and communication goals. The primary predictor variables were whether the scientists said they thought the public saw (1) too little risk in their area, (2) too much risk in their area, and (3) whether scientists thought their area was controversial.
The research question is the most crucial element of any academic paper and the first and most important stage in the publication process. A paper with results that are unoriginal, predictable, or trivial is less likely to be published.
Here are the answers to your questions:
1. FINER criteria of a good research question are: Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, Relevant.
2. A null hypothesis is a statistical hypothesis that predicts that no relationship exists between two variables.
3. The types of relationships that may exist between two variables are: positive, negative, or no relationship.
4. Read around comes first before read into. Read around gives a broad overview of the topic area, while read into involves an in-depth review.
5. The literature review is often called the "mother of the research" as it helps identify gaps and formulate the research question.
6. If we
Race to the Top Presentation on Integrated UnitsArch Grieve
This document summarizes an annual conference for the Dayton Regional STEM School. It provides information about the school's mission, philosophy, approach, student demographics, and test scores. The school's mission is to prepare students for the global economy while nurturing enthusiasm for discovery. The school's philosophy focuses on developing persistence, inquiry, communication, creativity, and collaboration in students. The school engages students in authentic, real-world problems and assesses them in various ways. It also emphasizes meaningful relationships with various partners. The document outlines the school's approach to team-based planning and integrated project development in nine steps. It provides examples of projects integrating various subjects around essential questions.
Workshop at SciTalk '22 on strategic science communication in which we make a strong argument for focusing on behavioral goals and communication objectives as beliefs, feelings, and frames.
This document discusses the important steps in formulating a research problem and developing a research question. It emphasizes that a research problem should address a specific question, rather than be an open-ended exploration. Key points covered include defining a clear and focused research question, identifying relevant variables, prioritizing problems based on criteria like relevance and feasibility, developing testable working hypotheses to guide the research, and justifying the chosen problem and research approach. Conducting a preliminary pilot study is also recommended to assess feasibility before finalizing the research plan.
Here are the answers to the quiz:
1. Research is a systematic process of collecting and analyzing information to increase our understanding of a topic or issue. It involves the discovery of new facts or testing new ideas.
2. Two reasons why we need to conduct research are:
- To gain new knowledge and understanding. Research allows us to discover new facts and relationships that were previously unknown. This expands our body of knowledge.
- To solve problems. Research helps us identify solutions to problems by testing new ideas and approaches through a systematic process. This allows us to improve practices, products, policies and theories.
3. Two general and specific purposes of research are:
- Description - Research describes a phenomenon. For example,
This document discusses research methodology and provides guidance for students and researchers. It defines research as a systematic process of inquiry to discover new information or revise existing knowledge through objective analysis. The document outlines various components of research including objectives, motivations, importance, and methods. It emphasizes that research is important for solving problems, advancing knowledge, and informing policies across scientific and non-scientific fields. The document is intended to educate and motivate young researchers.
Similar to Being Strategic in Science Communication (20)
2023 - MI Farm Bureau - Trust - How do you want to be perceived.pptxJohn C. Besley
Talk shared with the Michigan Farm Bureau Voice of Agriculture Conference in Traverse City, MI. Emphasis was on fostering a discussion about how the farm community could be more specific/strategic in trying to foster trust by demonstrating and communicating trustworthiness (i.e., ability/expertise, benevolence/caring, integrity, openness, shared values).
2022 - Book Talk: Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.pptxJohn C. Besley
This document discusses communication strategies for science engagement. It emphasizes the importance of:
1) Having clear and specific behavioral goals for target audiences rather than just general communication objectives. Goals could include increasing trust in scientists or influencing policymakers' funding decisions.
2) Understanding how communication objectives like shaping perceptions, emotions, and frames relate to behavioral goals, with objectives affecting goals indirectly.
3) Using evidence and social science theories to inform the choice of objectives and tactics, and evaluating their effectiveness, rather than just skills like storytelling. Strategic success requires achieving objectives that lead to goals.
4) Considering both fast, intuitive communication that relies on cognitive shortcuts, and slow, deliberative communication that aims to
SciPEP Goal Survey - Initial Thinking v2.pptxJohn C. Besley
This document discusses goals and objectives for scientists communicating their research to non-scientists. It proposes surveying scientists to understand their goals for communication and prioritization of different audiences and behavioral goals. The discussion focuses on categorizing goals as related to behavior, trust/legitimacy, or ensuring scientists make the best research decisions. It also considers asking scientists about priorities for communication objectives and perceptions of science communicators. The goal is to have an evidence-based understanding of scientists' communication goals to improve conversations around achieving those goals.
2022 Talk for for NIH Office of AIDS Research and Sexual Gender and Minority ...John C. Besley
This is a 30 minute talk from 2022 for participants in a post bachelors degree fellows program provided the NIH Office of AIDS Research and the Sexual Gender and Minority Research Office. The talk includes some new slides, thinking on strategic science communication
2022 - Fostering Strategic Science Communication related to TrustJohn C. Besley
This document summarizes a presentation on strategic science communication. It discusses how most science communication training focuses on individual tactical skills rather than strategic goals and objectives. It advocates treating communication choices as behaviors that can be influenced by attitudes, norms, and efficacy beliefs. The presentation argues that communication objectives that target evaluative beliefs, feelings, and frames are key to effective strategic communication. It provides models for how trust is built and discusses researching communication choices as planned behaviors. The overall message is that science communicators should be clearer about their goals and objectives in order to be strategic and effective.
Brief webinar on science talks at SRA in which I emphasize being clear about your goal and thinking about what content to include to achieve that goal. You don't just have to talk about the science; you should talk about the impact, etc.
LTAR 2021 - Strategic Science Communication - A Focus on GoalsJohn C. Besley
Short talk (and long discussion) about the value of being strategic in science communication the context of the annual meeting of the Long Term Agroecosystem Research Network (LTAR).
Talk on Trust and Trustworthiness in the USAJohn C. Besley
This document discusses trust and trustworthiness in science and scientists in the USA. It presents data showing levels of confidence in various institutions like the military, scientific community, and Supreme Court over time. It differentiates between behavioral trust and trustworthiness beliefs, noting the importance for communication strategy. Building trust requires demonstrating trustworthiness through behaviors, what is said, and how it is communicated. While efforts to communicate trustworthiness are ethical, fostering these beliefs will take time and organizations cannot reach everyone. Scientific groups should work to genuinely be trustworthy and address any weaknesses in how they are perceived.
2021 PCST - Response to Mike Schaefer's KeynoteJohn C. Besley
Slides for brief response to Mike Schaefer's 2021 keynote on audience segmentation in which I agree with Mike but also argue for the importance of setting communication goals before segmenting.
2021 - Communicating Astronomy with the Public TalkJohn C. Besley
An updated version of the 'strategic science communication' talk for astronomy communicators. Focuses more deeply on the goals that might make the most sense for basic science researchers.
2021 Hubbard Brook - Three questions about trust buildingJohn C. Besley
These are the slides from a 30 minute discussion about how we might think about trust building in the context of stakeholder engagement activities. Key argument is to recognize why we want people to see us in certain ways and then to recognize the dimensions of 'people perceptions.' Ultimately, strategy is needed to prioritize and implement procedures that ensure that we self-present in the way we want to be seen.
These are the slides from my 2020 talk on what Society for Risk Analysis members think about the potential communication goal of ensuring policymakers consider scientific evidence when making decisions. Key message is that scientists are open to the society helping members pursue such goals and that the best predictor of support are perceived likelihood for impact, potential for engagement enjoyment, and ethicality.
2020 Slides to Support Short SRA Plenary TalkJohn C. Besley
This document summarizes 40 years of risk communication research. It discusses what is now known about the psychological processes underlying risk perceptions and decision making, the evaluative beliefs that influence risk behaviors, the importance of affect and emotions, and how to ethically use communication tactics to influence behaviors. However, it notes that more needs to be done to get the scientific community to apply a more scientific approach to risk communication and rebuild trust in science.
This document discusses a study of the culture of public engagement at Hubbard Brook and Harvard Forest research sites. It presents survey and interview findings about scientists' levels and types of public engagement activities, attitudes towards engagement, and priorities for engagement goals and objectives. The study aims to understand the engagement culture at the sites and whether engagement efforts should focus more on strategic goals and aligned tactics and communication objectives.
1) The document reports on surveys conducted in 2017 and 2019 of scientists at Hubbard Brook and Harvard Forest to understand their attitudes towards public engagement and perceptions of engagement staff.
2) The surveys found moderate levels of self-reported public engagement activities among scientists, with willingness and opportunities for different engagement types varying.
3) Perceptions of engagement staff were generally positive, seeing them as respectful and competent, though interactions were often indirect or infrequent.
4) Future work includes additional interviews and surveys to further understand drivers of engagement among scientists and how to better support long-term public engagement infrastructure.
This document summarizes the work of understanding public engagement culture at Hubbard Brook and Harvard Forest over 2.5 years. Interviews and surveys of scientists were conducted in 2017, 2019, and will continue in 2020+ to track changes in engagement culture and its impacts over the long term. The path to better science communication involves ensuring organizational support for scientists and collaboration. As long-term research institutions embedded in communities, Hubbard Brook and Harvard Forest have an opportunity to enhance their impacts through building a culture that seriously supports public engagement.
This presentation focused on scientists' goals for communication and made a point of differentiating behavioral goals from nearer-term communication objectives (i.e., beliefs, feelings, frames that result from different communication choices. The data used came from two surveys of scientists; one done in the United States and one done in Canada.
Presentation shared with National Press Foundation fellows in Paris, France, on November 21, 2019. Key arguments were that overall views about scientists are quite positive both in an absolute sense as well as compared to other groups. However, we get a lot more information if we look at sub-dimensions of trustworthiness, and think about trust-related beliefs in the context of specific issues.
Video and audio available at: https://nationalpress.org/topic/confidence-in-scientists
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering.pptxDenish Jangid
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering
Syllabus
Chapter-1
Introduction to objective, scope and outcome the subject
Chapter 2
Introduction: Scope and Specialization of Civil Engineering, Role of civil Engineer in Society, Impact of infrastructural development on economy of country.
Chapter 3
Surveying: Object Principles & Types of Surveying; Site Plans, Plans & Maps; Scales & Unit of different Measurements.
Linear Measurements: Instruments used. Linear Measurement by Tape, Ranging out Survey Lines and overcoming Obstructions; Measurements on sloping ground; Tape corrections, conventional symbols. Angular Measurements: Instruments used; Introduction to Compass Surveying, Bearings and Longitude & Latitude of a Line, Introduction to total station.
Levelling: Instrument used Object of levelling, Methods of levelling in brief, and Contour maps.
Chapter 4
Buildings: Selection of site for Buildings, Layout of Building Plan, Types of buildings, Plinth area, carpet area, floor space index, Introduction to building byelaws, concept of sun light & ventilation. Components of Buildings & their functions, Basic concept of R.C.C., Introduction to types of foundation
Chapter 5
Transportation: Introduction to Transportation Engineering; Traffic and Road Safety: Types and Characteristics of Various Modes of Transportation; Various Road Traffic Signs, Causes of Accidents and Road Safety Measures.
Chapter 6
Environmental Engineering: Environmental Pollution, Environmental Acts and Regulations, Functional Concepts of Ecology, Basics of Species, Biodiversity, Ecosystem, Hydrological Cycle; Chemical Cycles: Carbon, Nitrogen & Phosphorus; Energy Flow in Ecosystems.
Water Pollution: Water Quality standards, Introduction to Treatment & Disposal of Waste Water. Reuse and Saving of Water, Rain Water Harvesting. Solid Waste Management: Classification of Solid Waste, Collection, Transportation and Disposal of Solid. Recycling of Solid Waste: Energy Recovery, Sanitary Landfill, On-Site Sanitation. Air & Noise Pollution: Primary and Secondary air pollutants, Harmful effects of Air Pollution, Control of Air Pollution. . Noise Pollution Harmful Effects of noise pollution, control of noise pollution, Global warming & Climate Change, Ozone depletion, Greenhouse effect
Text Books:
1. Palancharmy, Basic Civil Engineering, McGraw Hill publishers.
2. Satheesh Gopi, Basic Civil Engineering, Pearson Publishers.
3. Ketki Rangwala Dalal, Essentials of Civil Engineering, Charotar Publishing House.
4. BCP, Surveying volume 1
How to Make a Field Mandatory in Odoo 17Celine George
In Odoo, making a field required can be done through both Python code and XML views. When you set the required attribute to True in Python code, it makes the field required across all views where it's used. Conversely, when you set the required attribute in XML views, it makes the field required only in the context of that particular view.
How to Setup Warehouse & Location in Odoo 17 InventoryCeline George
In this slide, we'll explore how to set up warehouses and locations in Odoo 17 Inventory. This will help us manage our stock effectively, track inventory levels, and streamline warehouse operations.
This presentation was provided by Racquel Jemison, Ph.D., Christina MacLaughlin, Ph.D., and Paulomi Majumder. Ph.D., all of the American Chemical Society, for the second session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session Two: 'Expanding Pathways to Publishing Careers,' was held June 13, 2024.
Philippine Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (EPP) CurriculumMJDuyan
(𝐓𝐋𝐄 𝟏𝟎𝟎) (𝐋𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝟏)-𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐬
𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐏𝐏 𝐂𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐮𝐦 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐩𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬:
- Understand the goals and objectives of the Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (EPP) curriculum, recognizing its importance in fostering practical life skills and values among students. Students will also be able to identify the key components and subjects covered, such as agriculture, home economics, industrial arts, and information and communication technology.
𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐜𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐚𝐧 𝐄𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐮𝐫:
-Define entrepreneurship, distinguishing it from general business activities by emphasizing its focus on innovation, risk-taking, and value creation. Students will describe the characteristics and traits of successful entrepreneurs, including their roles and responsibilities, and discuss the broader economic and social impacts of entrepreneurial activities on both local and global scales.
Beyond Degrees - Empowering the Workforce in the Context of Skills-First.pptxEduSkills OECD
Iván Bornacelly, Policy Analyst at the OECD Centre for Skills, OECD, presents at the webinar 'Tackling job market gaps with a skills-first approach' on 12 June 2024
This document provides an overview of wound healing, its functions, stages, mechanisms, factors affecting it, and complications.
A wound is a break in the integrity of the skin or tissues, which may be associated with disruption of the structure and function.
Healing is the body’s response to injury in an attempt to restore normal structure and functions.
Healing can occur in two ways: Regeneration and Repair
There are 4 phases of wound healing: hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling. This document also describes the mechanism of wound healing. Factors that affect healing include infection, uncontrolled diabetes, poor nutrition, age, anemia, the presence of foreign bodies, etc.
Complications of wound healing like infection, hyperpigmentation of scar, contractures, and keloid formation.
BÀI TẬP DẠY THÊM TIẾNG ANH LỚP 7 CẢ NĂM FRIENDS PLUS SÁCH CHÂN TRỜI SÁNG TẠO ...
Being Strategic in Science Communication
1. Thinking about objectives and
goals for science communication
John C. Besley, Ph.D. (Twitter: @johnbesley)
Ellis N. Brandt Chair
College of Communication Arts and Sciences
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.
2. My objectives
1. You will think about engagement as a strategic
act that involves purposeful choice of long-term
goals and intermediate objectives.
2. You will think about engagement tactics and
skills in terms of whether they can help you
achieve your intermediate objectives.
4. Numbers vary … but scientists clearly engage
• 63% interacted with a journalist in last year
Dunwoody and Ryan, 1985
• 70% interacted with a journalist in last 3 years
Peters, Brossard, de Cheveigné, Dunwoody, 2008
• 51% have ever interacted with journalist
AAAS 2015
• 33% engaged directly with policy-makers
Royal Society 2006
• 24% blogged about science
AAAS 2015
• 13% worked with a science center/museum
Royal Society 2006
*All work done collaboratively with Anthony Dudo, U. Texas
5. 5
Our new survey data: U.S.-Based Scientific Societies
Type of society N Rate n* Avg. Age Male White
General 1,257 8% 1,064 62 69% 90%
Microbiology* 1,111 14% 634** 53 54% 60%
Geophysical 1,013 10% 877** 50 65% 89%
Geological 2,304 10% 666 50 67% 92%
Chemical# 1,257 5% 374** 51 68% 86%
Ecological 732 11% 339 53 60% 93%
Biochemistry (TBD)
Social Science (TBD)
Sci. Comm. Experts (TBD)
* Respondents who are university affiliated and not a student and all societies except the
ecological society received 4 contacts (they received 3 contacts), **Sample for some reported
questions smaller because of sample splitting by engagement mode, # Survey still in progress
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.
6. 6
Past Engagement previous 12 months (never) …
Type of society F2F News Online Policy
General 34% 45% 59% 58%
Microbiology 41% 54% 51% 70%
Geophysical 26% 38% 47% 59%
Geological 21% 41% 51% 62%
Chemical (TBD) 40% 62% 60% 77%
Ecological (TBD) 26% 38% 47% 59%
0.00-
9.99
10.00-
19.99
20.00-
29.99
30.00-
39.99
40.00-
49.99
50.00-
59.99
60.00-
69.99
70.00-
79.99
80.00-
89.99
90.00-
100.00
%
Many U.S. scientists
engage, especially
face-to-face
7. 7
Willingness to engage …
Type of society F2F Policy News Online
General 5.63 5.25 5.14 3.98
Microbiology 5.81 5.32 5.05 4.57
Geophysical 5.97 5.43 5.46 4.62
Geological 5.97 5.17 5.23 4.25
Chemical 5.38 4.64 4.58 4.20
Ecological 6.02 5.63 5.54 4.55
1.00-
1.49
1.50-
1.99
2.00-
2.49
2.50-
2.99
3.00-
3.49
3.50-
3.99
4.00-
4.49
4.50-
4.99
5.00-
5.49
5.50-
5.99
6.00-
6.49
6.50-
7.00
Typical SE is between .05 and .08Scientists want to engage,
especially face-to-face and
with policy makers
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
8. 8
Societal goals (for Face-to-Face engagement) …
Type of society Use
Evidence
Culture
Values
Better
Personal
Research
Funding
STEM
Careers
Diversify
STEM
General 6.34 6.15 5.59 5.52 5.29 5.05
Microbiology 6.38 6.31 5.80 5.78 5.46 5.22
Geophysical 6.40 6.06 5.50 5.00 5.03 5.08
Geological 6.35 6.09 5.66 5.15 5.41 5.00
Chemical (TBD) 6.11 6.18 5.62 5.51 5.28 5.03
Ecological (TBD) 6.54 6.04 5.76 5.09 5.07 5.26• Getting policy makers to use scientific evidence
• Helping ensure our culture values science
• Helping people use science to make better personal
decisions
• Obtaining adequate funding for scientific research
• Getting more young people to choose scientific
careers
• Helping to diversify the STEM workforce
9. 9
Societal goals (for Face-to-Face engagement) …
Type of society Use
Evidence
Value
Science
Better
Personal
Research
Funding
STEM
Careers
Diversify
STEM
General 6.34 6.15 5.59 5.52 5.29 5.05
Microbiology 6.38 6.31 5.80 5.78 5.46 5.22
Geophysical 6.40 6.06 5.50 5.00 5.03 5.08
Geological 6.35 6.09 5.66 5.15 5.41 5.00
Chemical 6.11 6.18 5.62 5.51 5.28 5.03
Ecological 6.54 6.04 5.76 5.09 5.07 5.26
1.00-
1.49
1.50-
1.99
2.00-
2.49
2.50-
2.99
3.00-
3.49
3.50-
3.99
4.00-
4.49
4.50-
4.99
5.00-
5.49
5.50-
5.99
6.00-
6.49
6.50-
7.00
Typical SE is between .05 and .08Scientists most want others
to draw on evidence and
value science culture
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
Very similar results for
other modalities (i.e. online,
media), when available
10. What happens if you get really good
at communicating the wrong stuff?
I don’t mean
bad content…
11. Most science communication training …
• Focuses on writing/speaking skills
• Focuses on honing YOUR message
• Understanding media/political norms
• Focuses on learning to use technology
12. What does it mean to be an “effective” communicator?
14. What do scientists want to ULTIMATELY
achieve through public engagement?
(Write it down)
15. How many of you wrote:
• Raise awareness of XYX topic
• Teach people about XYZ topic
• Correct myths about XYZ topic
• Get people interested in XYZ topic
• Build positive image of science
• Get people to think about XYZ topic in a new way
The may be good things … but I do not
think of them as ULTIMATE goals …
• Key question: Why do you
want to “raise awareness,” etc.
16. How many of you wrote:
• Seek a specific policy position (e.g. climate action)
• Seek more funding for science
• Seek more freedom for scientific endeavors
• Make the world healthier, wealthier, and wiser
• Promote science as a career*
To me … these are the ULTIMATE goals
(*this may be an intermediate objective)
17. 1
Objective Prioritization (for Face-to-Face engagement) …
Very similar results for mediated, and online engagement
Type of
society
Inform/
Educate
Interest
/Excite
Defend
Science
Show
caring
Show
openness
Frame
Issue
Show
Values
Hear
Others
Show
Expert
General 6.21 5.99 5.77 5.73 5.50 5.30 5.33 5.16 4.86
Microbiology 6.27 6.01 6.03 5.78 5.47 5.38 5.37 5.23 4.97
Geophysical 6.20 5.86 5.58 5.45 5.36 5.22 4.99 4.88 4.69
Geological 6.19 5.93 5.91 5.57 5.40 5.15 5.15 4.88 4.91
Chemical 6.15 5.70 5.85 5.64 5.51 5.14 5.30 5.00 4.90
Ecological 6.03 5.97 5.44 5.33 5.07 4.98 5.33 4.96 4.31
• Helping to inform people about scientific issues
• Getting people interested or excited about
science
• Defending science from those who spread
falsehoods
• Showing that the scientific community cares
about society's well-being
• Demonstrating the scientific community's
openness and transparency
• Framing research implications so members of the
public think about a topic in a way that resonates
with their values
• Showing that scientists share community values
• Hearing what others think about scientific issues
• Showing the scientific community's expertise
18. 1
Objective Prioritization (for Face-to-Face engagement) …
Type of
society
Inform/
Educate
Interest
/Excite
Defend
science
Show
caring
Show
openness
Frame
issue
Show
values
Hear
others
Show
expert
General 6.21 5.99 5.77 5.73 5.50 5.30 5.33 5.16 4.86
Microbiology 6.27 6.01 6.03 5.78 5.47 5.38 5.37 5.23 4.97
Geophysical 6.20 5.86 5.58 5.45 5.36 5.22 4.99 4.88 4.69
Geological 6.19 5.93 5.91 5.57 5.40 5.15 5.15 4.88 4.91
Chemical 6.15 5.70 5.85 5.64 5.51 5.14 5.30 5.00 4.90
Ecological 6.03 5.97 5.44 5.33 5.07 4.98 5.33 4.96 4.31
1.00-
1.49
1.50-
1.99
2.00-
2.49
2.50-
2.99
3.00-
3.49
3.50-
3.99
4.00-
4.49
4.50-
4.99
5.00-
5.49
5.50-
5.99
6.00-
6.49
6.50-
7.00
Typical SE is between .05 and .08
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
BUT scientists love the
‘literacy’ objective …
19. Tactics, objectives, and goals
*Work done collaboratively with Anthony Dudo, U. Texas
Scientists may/should
also have personal
goals (enhance career
and sense of impact)
Channels provide
different
“affordances”
Not every
objective is
equally effective …
29. Objective:
Build positive views
about science/scientists
Those involved in
science have
a generally
positive image?
2013 Harris poll on views
about professions
39. Tactics, objectives, and goals
*Work done collaboratively with Anthony Dudo, U. Texas
If not just
knowledge, what
else can we
focus on?
40. Tversksy, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of
decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
Classic work on heuristics …
41. Tversksy, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of
decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
42. “Frames are interpretive storylines that set a
specific train of thought in motion,
communicating why an issue might be a problem,
who or what might be responsible for it, and
what should be done about it.”
Objective: Put issue in new context (frame)
Nisbet, Matthew C. 2010. "Framing science: A new paradigm in public engagement." In
Communicating Science: New Agendas in Communication, edited by L. A. Kahlor and P. A. Stout, 40-67.
44. “Frames are interpretive storylines
that set a specific train of thought in
motion, communicating why an issue
might be a problem, who or what
might be responsible for it, and what
should be done about it.”
This is really about _______________ and how ____________ is/are
responsible for ____________. We therefore need to _____________.
This is really about Bill Gates copied Apple and how Microsoft is
responsible for copyright infringement. We therefore need to sue.
Re. How should we think about the origins of the graphical user interface?
This is really about Apple and Microsoft both borrowed an idea from
the public conversation (i.e., Xerox) and how no one is responsible for
damages. We therefore need to do nothing, except compete.
45. (U.S.-centric) Framing quiz …
Is it an estate tax or a _______________
Is it oil drilling or ___________________
Is it eavesdropping or _______________
Is it a used car or a __________________
Is it a secretary or a __________________
Is it anti-abortion or __________________
Is it pro-abortion or __________________
If you’re against a union or for ______________
It’s not single-payer medicine it’s ___________
You’re not an environmentalist you’re a ______
I’m not a liberal I’m a _____________________
It’s not (just) a regulation it’s a _____________
Others???
52. Tactics, objectives, and goals
What do they want to hear?
What might they want to say?
What do they think/feel about you?
How are they thinking about issues?
But don’t forget …
What are YOU trying to achieve?
What is the ethical path
to achieving it?
53. Logic model/Theories of change
We will you do:
___________
It will lead to:
___________
It will lead to:
___________
It will lead to:
___________
The impact will be:
___________
The impact will be:
___________
What skills do we need: ___________________
What resources do we need: _______________
What’s the first step: ______________________
How does this fit our needs: ________________
How does this fit our values: _______________
How will you know if you succeed: __________
+
54. Final thoughts I …
There are no
silver bullets
Not everyone
is reachable
It takes time
55. Final thoughts II …
It might be okay to
have a friend
photograph your
wedding … 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.
But sometimes
help is … helpful.
And there’s no
need to reinvent
the wheel …