Assessing Public Engagement Outcomes by the Use of an Outcome Expectations Scale for Scientists

Abstract

This study presents initial work to validate a scale designed to measure scientists’ outcome expectations in relation to public engagement. A 20-item survey was administered to a sample of 341 scientists. Graded response models were used to assess the quality of the items. Results suggest that six items provided the strongest measure of outcome expectations, with classically adequate reliability across a wide range of scientists and scores. The findings are presented in relation to the short-term outcomes of public engagement for scientists and the need for validated scales that allow for the continued study of science communication efforts.

Bridging the gap between science communication practice and theory: Reflecting on a decade of practitioner experience using polar outreach case studies to develop a new framework for public engagement design

“…Further research has focused on helping scientist-communicators improve and assess their self-efficacy (Robertson Evia, Peterman, Cloyd, & Besley, 2018) and reflect on their efforts and goals to encourage EOC approaches that emphasise "reciprocal exchanges" between scientists and publics (Peterman, Robertson Evia, Cloyd, & Besley, 2017). These exchanges are thought to increase connectedness between scientists and the communities or publics with whom they interact through their EOC efforts (e.g.…”

“…These exchanges are thought to increase connectedness between scientists and the communities or publics with whom they interact through their EOC efforts (e.g. Mayhew & Hall, 2012;Peterman et al, 2017) and is another way to describe dialogue-driven approaches. As an example, Peterman et al (2017) developed an Outcome Expectancy Scale, a new evaluation scale intended to help measure "outcome expectations" for both scientists and publics engaged in EOC activities.…”

Evaluating Informal STEM Education: Issues and Challenges in Context

“…Some focus on public engagement with science and, specifically, the outcomes of volunteer citizen scientists (e.g., the Developing, Validating and Implementing Situated Evaluation Instruments [DEVISE] scales; Cornell Lab of Ornithology, ); others target constructs such as the “activation” of science learning that can bridge formal and informal contexts (Activation Lab, ). Most recently, the American Association for the Advancement of Science commissioned the development of shared measures for scientists who participate in public engagement activities (Peterman, Robertson Evia, Cloyd, & Besley, in press; Robertson Evia, Peterman, Cloyd, & Besley, ).…”

Can scientists fill the science journalism void? Online public engagement with science stories authored by scientists

“…Correlational studies have shown that scientists who engage with the public also perform better academically (26,27). Web 2.0 provides scientists with platforms to directly disseminate their scientific messages, and allows broad audiences to comment, react, and potentially engage in dialogue with scientists (2,6,28,29).…”