Content uploaded by Craig Cormick
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Craig Cormick on Aug 17, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
What Do Science Communicators Talk About When They Talk About Science Communications? Engaging With the Engagers
Abstract and Figures
A series of workshops on impediments and solutions to best practice in science communication in Australia not only provided insights into the diversity of the community of practice but also reflected discords between best practice and popular ideas among practitioners.
Figures - uploaded by Craig Cormick
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Craig Cormick
Content may be subject to copyright.
... A major and frequently observed obstacle to successful engagement is the prevalence of the knowledge deficit model, an intuitive but poorly supported model that asserts that differences of opinion are due to differences in access to facts (e.g. Cormick et al. 2015, Cortassa 2016, Simis et al. 2016, Suldovsky 2016. Accordingly, one-way provision of information from experts to non-experts is seen as sufficient to eliminate differences of knowledge and thus of opinion. ...
... Given these criticisms of the deficit model, more recent scientific communication literature emphasizes the value of participatory approaches that provide opportunities for thought exchange, deliberation, and critique (e.g. Bray et al. 2012, Cormick et al. 2015, Kuehne et al. 2014, Suldovsky 2016. This emphasis on participation stands in particular contrast to the deficit model's assumption of a passive audience and benevolent communicator (Bray et al. 2012). ...
... Notably, at least one investigation has found that communicators often favor participatory models but feel impeded by a lack of resources and support ("Inspiring Australia," as referenced by Cormick et al. 2015). ...
Water management for oil and natural gas extraction in the United States has become a topic of public interest and concern. This societal relevance simultaneously heightens the need for rigorous performance and dissemination of scientific work and invites caution from experts who are communicating within what is likely a politicized public conversation. This paper uses interviews to investigate experts' current practices and comfort with communicating about water use for oil and natural gas. Participants cite face-to-face interactions and trust-based relationships as important in their interactions, which is consistent with research about effective communication. However, few participants highlight techniques specific to communicating about water as it relates to oil and gas or about controversial issues generally. Participants also rarely use communication science related to objective setting, framing, and measuring success for improvement, likely in part because of a lack of evidence-based training. In many cases, interviewees expressed attitudes consistent with the deficit model of scientific communication, which holds that presentation of scientific facts will change public opinion. This model has been shown to be relatively ineffective. This paper highlights the need for careful communication and evidence-based opportunities for improvement, including a suggestion that professional societies host communication training and coaching sessions.
... But for researchers, which only engage in climate change communication initiatives from time to time, might not be so obvious and is definitely more challenging. Capacitating researchers to engage with non-academic audiences, in particular children, is thus a crucial step towards a combined approach that celebrates science and encourages the critical evaluation of CC-related scientific endeavours (Baker 2019;Cormick et al. 2015;Meenakshi 2021), while at the same time motivates for active citizenship. ...
... ej. Cormick et al, 2014, Smith y Leiserowitz 2014. ...
En este capítulo ofrecemos una tipología que permita clasificar los vídeos online de divulgación científica, mediante el análisis de una amplia muestra de vídeos, sintetizando los resultados obtenidos en investigaciones previas (De Lara, García-Avilés y Revuelta, 2017; García-Avilés, 2015). También destacamos aquellos formatos de video online que resultan especialmente innovadores, por la tecnología o el tratamiento del tema que abordan.
... Investigation specifically concerning the activities of science communicators is less frequent (e.g., Cormick, Nielssen, Ashworth, La Salle, & Saab, 2015;Miller, 2008;Riesch et al., 2016). One example is the survey done in the United States based on 497 questionnaires to science writers, editors, and researchers about important questions, opportunities, and unresolved issues in science communication (Treise & Weigold, 2002). ...
This exploratory study is focused on the perceptions of science communication practitioners about the activities of scientists and the audiences of the marine sciences outreach in Portugal. Using the qualitative method of thematic analysis and collecting data through semistructured interviews of 14 practitioners of diverse professions, backgrounds, ages, and stages of career, it was found that the role of marine scientists in this area is traditionally viewed as reduced, but with a slight improvement in the past 5 to 10 years. Despite having a historical connection with and curiosity about the sea, audiences were considered to have a mostly utilitarian interest in the marine sciences. Most practitioners had a view of science communication connected to the knowledge deficit model, with a minority articulating a more dialogical model. Although there are signs of conflict between science communicators and scientists, the proliferation of training opportunities in science communication at the national level, the perceived increase of interest and participation of marine scientists in public communication in the past years, and the consolidation of science communicators as part of the scientific community offer positive prospects for the future of outreach of marine sciences in Portugal.
... A scientific news portal that provides information directly from those who produce it (the scientific, medical and environmental community) to the general public. Futurity, which has now extended to more organizations and also to institutions in Great Britain, is a clear alternative to what used to be the most common (Cormick, Nielssen, Ashworth, La Salle, & Saab, 2015). In other words, a "bypass" has been created today that allows the world of science to skip the unavoidable collaboration or -for some -the obstacle represented by the media in their objective of circulating information to the general public, who also have the option of searching for information directly from the specialized sources. ...
Qualitative interviews with Chinese scientist science communicators ( n = 15) and citizen science communicators ( n = 15) on Zhihu suggest that there is a struggle between the two groups to be seen as legitimate science communicators online. Public users tried to show their enthusiasm as science communicators, integrate into the circle of science communicators and blur the boundary between scientists and themselves. The participating scientists tend to discount such activity and indicate that they are more legitimate science communicators, possessing the requisite scientific literacy and noble personal morality.
Conversations about climate change at the science-policy interface and in our lives have been stuck for some time. This handbook integrates lessons from the social sciences and humanities to more effectively make connections through issues, people, and things that everyday citizens care about. Readers will come away with an enhanced understanding that there is no ‘silver bullet' to communications about climate change; instead, a ‘silver buckshot' approach is needed, where strategies effectively reach different audiences in different contexts. This tactic can then significantly improve efforts that seek meaningful, substantive, and sustained responses to contemporary climate challenges. It can also help to effectively recapture a common or middle ground on climate change in the public arena. Readers will come away with ideas on how to harness creativity to better understand what kinds of communications work where, when, why, and under what conditions in the twenty-first century.
This guide accompanies the following article: Kohen, Z. & Dori, Y. J., Toward narrowing the gap between science communication and science education disciplines, Review of Education, 10.1002/rev3.3136
Science communication and science education aim to expose citizens to scientific knowledge, which is increasingly becoming a prerequisite for effective participation in modern society. We aim to present a review of science communication and science education literature, for highlighting the need for and importance of narrowing the gap between the two communities. Our objective was to find what themes, if any, are common to the two disciplines, based on keyword searches of the literature, that represent overlap constructs between the two communities. We searched for academic articles published from 2000 to 2017 in three science communication journals and three science education journals, which contained the keywords science communication, science engagement and science understanding. A three‐stage literature review yielded 70 papers that provided the basis for common theme identification: (i) attitudes towards the importance of science communication, (ii) communication channel types and (iii) scientific knowledge construction. Findings reveal similarities and disparities between the two communities and the stakeholders they investigated. Both communities agree on the meaning of process and product science communication constructs. Yet, while the science education community mainly relates to the product construct, the science communication community mainly relays to the communication construct. We then discuss the value of fostering dialogue between the two communities. Our research contributes to raising the awareness of the value of maintaining ongoing dialogue between science communication and science education communities, accounting for the three common themes we have identified, implying that a common language is emerging, and the variety of stakeholders involved.
The exchange of information between researchers, resource managers, decision makers, and the general public has long been recognized as a critical need in environmental science. We examine the challenges in using ecological knowledge to inform society and to change societal actions, and identify a set of options and strategies to enhance this exchange. Our objectives are to provide background information on societal knowledge and interest in science and environmental issues, to describe how different components of society obtain information and develop their interests and values, and to present a framework for evaluating and improving communication between science and society. Our analysis strongly suggests that the interface between science and society can only be improved with renewed dedication to public outreach and a wholesale reconsideration of the way that scientists communicate with society. Ecologists need to adopt new models of engagement with their audiences, frame their results in ways that are more meaningful to these audiences, and use new communication tools, capable of reaching large and diverse target groups.
There is a growing call for greater public involvement in establishing science and technology policy, in line with democratic ideals. A variety of public participation procedures exist that aim to consult and involve the public, ranging from the public hearing to the consensus conference. Unfortunately, a general lack of empirical consideration of the quality of these methods arises from confusion as to the appropriate benchmarks for evaluation. Given that the quality of the output of any participation exercise is difficult to determine, the authors suggest the need to consider which aspects of the process are desirable and then to measure the presence or quality of these process aspects. To this end, a number of theoretical evaluation criteria that are essential for effective public participation are specified. These comprise two types: acceptance criteria, which concern features of a method that make it acceptable to the wider public, and process criteria, which concern features of the process that are liable to ensure that it takes place in an effective manner. Future research needs to develop instruments to measure these criteria more precisely and identify the contextual and environmental factors that will mediate the effectiveness of the different participation methods.
A national strategy for engaging with the sciences
- Inspiring Australia
Inspiring Australia. (2010). A national strategy for engaging with the sciences.
Canberra, Australia: Department of Innovation.
Science engagement in Australia is a 20th century toy. Conversation
- J Metcalfe
Metcalfe, J. (2013, March 12). Science engagement in Australia is a 20th century toy.
Conversation.
National audit of Australian science engagement activities
- J Metcalfe
- J Alford
- J Shore
Metcalfe, J., Alford, J., & Shore, J. (2012). National audit of Australian science
engagement activities. Canberra, Australia: Inspiring Australia.
Ten lessons for a nanodialogue: How to be deadly serious and still have serious fun
- R Este
Este, R. (2008). Ten lessons for a nanodialogue: How to be deadly serious and
still have serious fun. The Hague, Netherlands: Rathenau Institute.
- Lords House
House of Lords. 2000. Science and Society. Select Committee on Science and
Technology Science and Society (London).
Dialogue with the public: Practical guidelines
Research Councils UK (RCUK). (2002). Dialogue with the public: Practical guidelines. Swindon, UK.
Department of Innovation
Science and Technology Engagement Pathways (STEP). (2012). Department of
Innovation, Australia.