Strategic science communication (Short Version): Delivered in Stellenbosch Sept. 2015
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
2 likes•496 views
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.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (17)
Similar to Strategic science communication (Short Version): Delivered in Stellenbosch Sept. 2015
Similar to Strategic science communication (Short Version): Delivered in Stellenbosch Sept. 2015 (20)
More from John C. Besley
More from John C. Besley (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Strategic science communication (Short Version): Delivered in Stellenbosch Sept. 2015
- 1. Thinking about objectives and goals for science communication John C. Besley, Ph.D. (@johnbesley) Ellis N. Brandt Chair College of Communication Arts and Sciences
- 2. My current research objectives 1. Explicate engagement as a strategic act that involves purposeful choice of long-term goals and intermediate objectives. 2. Better understand why communicators adopt or reject a strategic approach (as a means of improving training).
- 3. Engagement is … Face-to-face Direct w/policy-makers Online Mediated
- 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 Our own AAAS data (2013, n = 388) • 75% had engaged face-to-face • 49% had engaged online • 45% had interacted with the media • 30% had “other”-wise engaged *All work done collaboratively with Anthony Dudo, U. Texas
- 5. Most science communication training … • Focuses on writing/speaking skills • Focuses on honing YOUR message • Understanding media/political norms • Focuses on learning to use technology
- 6. What happens if you get really good at communicating the wrong stuff? I don’t mean bad content…
- 7. What does it mean to be an “effective” communicator?
- 8. In strategic communication: Effective = Achieving Your Goals
- 9. What do you want to ULTIMATELY achieve through public engagement?
- 10. How many of you thought about: • 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.
- 11. How many of you: • 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)
- 12. 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 …
- 13. Objective: Increase science literacy/awareness It is true that science literacy is low, low, low
- 14. Objective: Increase science literacy/awareness Also true that nobody knows much about much
- 15. Objective: Increase science literacy/awareness Knowledge has only limited impact on attitudes
- 16. Objective: Increase science literacy/awareness
- 17. 2013 AAAS Scientist Survey: Objectives 4.96 5.34 4.59 5 5.22 4.76 5.59 5.88 5.72 6.04 5.96 5.79 6.14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 messaging goal average (r = .54) describing … in ways that make them relevant framing research … {to} resonate … trust goals average (r = .54) demonstrating … openness & transparency hearing what others think … getting people excited about science knowledge goals average (r = .41) ensuring that scientists … are part of … ensuring that people are informed … defensive goals average (r = .63) defending science … correcting scientific misinformation “How much should each of the following be a priority for online public engagement?” All questions had a range of 1-7 where 1 was the “lowest priority” and 7 was the “highest priority” BUT scientists love the ‘literacy’ objective …
- 18. SHARING knowledge will always be a central part of science communication (But …)
- 19. Tactics, objectives, and goals *Work done collaboratively with Anthony Dudo, U. Texas If not just knowledge, what else can we focus on?
- 20. A few thoughts about ethics
- 21. Objective: Build positive views about science/scientists Those involved in science have a generally positive image?
- 22. Objective: Build positive views about science/scientists Those involved in science have a generally positive image?
- 23. Objective: Build positive views about science/scientists But there’s a catch … You’re seen as competent but cold
- 24. 2013 AAAS Scientist Survey: Objectives 4.96 5.34 4.59 5 5.22 4.76 5.59 5.88 5.72 6.04 5.96 5.79 6.14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 messaging goal average (r = .54) describing … in ways that make them relevant framing research … {to} resonate … trust goals average (r = .54) demonstrating … openness & transparency hearing what others think … getting people excited about science knowledge goals average (r = .41) ensuring that scientists … are part of … ensuring that people are informed … defensive goals average (r = .63) defending science … correcting scientific misinformation Strategic objectives “How much should each of the following be a priority for online public engagement?” All questions had a range of 1-7 where 1 was the “lowest priority” and 7 was the “highest priority”
- 25. If warmth is so important, how can scientists be seen as more warm/respectful?
- 26. Face-to-face Direct w/policy-makers Online Mediated Public Engagement = Positive Public Interaction
- 27. I have questions about the impact of these … (Research in progress)
- 28. And these too… (Research in progress) Funny and/or cathartic Equal effective communication
- 29. And these too… (Research in progress)
- 30. Tactics, objectives, and goals *Work done collaboratively with Anthony Dudo, U. Texas If not just knowledge, what else can we focus on?
- 31. “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.
- 32. Backlash to “security” frame Framing doesn’t always work as planned …
- 33. 2013 AAAS Scientist Survey: Objectives 4.96 5.34 4.59 5 5.22 4.76 5.59 5.88 5.72 6.04 5.96 5.79 6.14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 messaging goal average (r = .54) describing … in ways that make them relevant framing research … {to} resonate … trust goals average (r = .54) demonstrating … openness & transparency hearing what others think … getting people excited about science knowledge goals average (r = .41) ensuring that scientists … are part of … ensuring that people are informed … defensive goals average (r = .63) defending science … correcting scientific misinformation Strategic objectives “How much should each of the following be a priority for online public engagement?” All questions had a range of 1-7 where 1 was the “lowest priority” and 7 was the “highest priority” When do scientists pursue objectives? • When they think they’ll have effect. • When they think they have the skill to achieve the effect.
- 34. Finally: What does it mean to know your “audience” (= “interlocutors”)?
- 35. 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?
- 36. Exercise ... 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: __________ +
- 37. Final thoughts I … There are no silver bullets Not everyone is reachable It takes time
- 38. Final thoughts II … It might be okay to have a friend photograph your wedding … But sometimes help is … helpful. And there’s no need to reinvent the wheel …
Editor's Notes
- Need to integrate idea of “schemas” Book mentions framing in terms of how survey questions are asked … (pretty common problem) Framing tells people how to think about an ambiguous topic or event; works best when the way of thinking fits with an existing schema.
- also mentioned on p. 103-104