Notwithstanding that ‘public engagement’ is conceptualised differently internationally and in different academic disciplines, higher education institutions largely accept the importance of public engagement with research. However, there is limited evidence on how researchers conceptualise engagement, their views on what constitutes engagement and the communities they would (or would not) like to engage with. This paper presents the results of a survey of researchers in the Open University that sought to gather data to fill these gaps. This research was part of an action research project designed to embed engagement in the routine practices of researchers at all levels. The findings indicate that researchers have a relatively narrow view of public engagement with research and the communities with which they interact. It also identified that very few strategically evaluate their public engagement activities. We conclude by discussing some of the interventions we have introduced with the aim of broadening and deepening future researcher engagement.

Backgrounde-Bug is a pan-European educational resource for junior and senior school children, which contains activities covering prudent antibiotic use and the spread, treatment, and prevention of infection. Teaching resources for children aged 7-15 years are complemented by a student website that hosts games and interactive activities for the children to continue their learning at home.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to appraise young people’s opinions of 3 antibiotic games on the e-Bug student website, exploring children’s views and suggestions for improvements, and analyzing change in their knowledge around the learning outcomes covered. The 3 games selected for evaluation all contained elements and learning outcomes relating to antibiotics, the correct use of antibiotics, and bacteria and viruses.MethodsA mixed methodological approach was undertaken, wherein 153 pupils aged 9-11 years in primary schools and summer schools in the Bristol and Gloucestershire area completed a questionnaire with antibiotic and microbe questions, before and after playing 3 e-Bug games for a total of 15 minutes. The after questionnaire also contained open-ended and Likert scale questions. In addition, 6 focus groups with 48 students and think-aloud sessions with 4 students who had all played the games were performed.ResultsThe questionnaire data showed a significant increase in knowledge for 2 out of 7 questions (P=.01 and P<.001), whereas all questions showed a small level of increase. The two areas of significant knowledge improvement focused around the use of antibiotics for bacterial versus viral infections and ensuring the course of antibiotics is completed. Qualitative data showed that the e-Bug game “Body Busters” was the most popular, closely followed by “Doctor Doctor,” and “Microbe Mania” the least popular.ConclusionsThis study shows that 2 of the e-Bug antibiotic educational games are valuable. “Body Busters” effectively increased antibiotic knowledge in children and had the greatest flow and enjoyment. “Doctor Doctor” also resulted in increased knowledge, but was less enjoyable. “Microbe Mania” had neither flow nor knowledge gain and therefore needs much modification and review. The results from the qualitative part of this study will be very important to inform future modifications and improvements to the e-Bug games.

Open science is a practice in which the scientific process is shared completely and in real time. It offers the potential to support information flow, collaboration and dialogue among professional and non-professional participants. Using semi-structured interviews and case studies, this research investigated the relationship between open science and public engagement. This article concentrates on three particular areas of concern that emerged: first, how to effectively contextualise and narrate information to render it accessible, as opposed to simply available; second, concerns about data quantity and quality; and third, concerns about the skills required for effective contextualisation, mapping and interpretation of information.

The use and availability of digital media is changing researchers' roles and simultaneously providing a route for a more engaging relationship with stakeholders throughout the research process. Although the digital realm has a profound influence on people's day-to-day lives, some researchers have not yet professionally embraced digital technologies. This paper arises from one aspect of a project exploring how university research and professional practices are evolving as researchers engage with stakeholders via digital media to create, share and represent knowledge together. Using researchers from the Open University (U.K.) as a case study, this paper reviews the extent to which they are developing multiple identities and functions in their engaged research through digital media.

The emerging practice of open science, which makes the entire process of a scientific investigation available, could extend membership of the research community to new, public audiences, who do not have access to science's long-established trust mechanisms. This commentary considers if the structures that enable scientists to trust each other, and the public to trust scientists, are enriched by the open science approach. The completeness of information provided by open science, whether as a replacement for or complement to older systems for establishing trust within science, makes it a potentially useful "trust technology."Keywords public perception of scientists, public understanding of science, scientific Trust in science rests on a delicate structure of largely unwritten rules, based on the concepts of civility of 17th-and 18th-century England (Shapin, 1994). Through their publications, the scholarly journals that have their roots in that era provide a "virtual witnessing"-a "trust technology" that offers a powerful reassurance that things really were done in the way it is claimed that they Commentary