Complexity, transparency and time pressure: practical insights into science communication in times of crisis

Abstract

A global crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic that started in early 2020 poses significant challenges for how research is conducted and communicated. We present four case studies from the perspective of an interdisciplinary research institution that switched to “corona-mode” during the first two months of the crisis, focussing all its capacities on COVID-19-related issues, communicating to the public directly and via media, as well as actively advising the national government. The case studies highlight the challenges posed by the increased time pressure, high demand for transparency, and communication of complexity and uncertainty. The article gives insights into how these challenges were addressed in our research institution and how science communication in general can be managed during a crisis.

Perceptions of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the work of science journalists: global perspectives

“…A personal or institutional willingness to facilitate journalists' access to scientific sources can contribute to the transparency of information [Dance, 2018]. For example, the case study by Lasser et al [2020] reports the experience of the Complexity Science Hub Vienna (CSH), which quickly changed communication from a "science push" to a "policy (and media) pull" scenario. Thus, researchers on the front line were asked to participate in the publication cycle of broad media outlets to a far greater extent than before the crisis.…”

“…Scientific data needed to be published quickly and there was a significant increase in preprint manuscripts, without peer review, which have been widely used since the crisis took global proportions [Fleerackers et al, 2021;Fraser et al, 2020]. On the other hand, the pandemic has sparked great public interest in science issues and its processes [Lasser et al, 2020].…”

Lessons from the field: The role of agility in a coproduction project encompassing the COVID‐19 pandemic

“…The circumstances of the pandemic, as a point of social upheaval to which many institutions reacted by reducing public engagement and involvement, particularly in medical research, and that both reinforced and undermined the authority of medicine and medical research, 20 created a shift in power dynamics within our project team. The shifting professional and personal responsibilities of team members caused ‘creative disruption’ and inadvertently created the human level of engagement recommended in the NIHR guidance ( https://www.invo.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Copro_Guidance_Feb19.pdf , 26 February 2021).…”

Communicating Corrected Risk Assessments and Uncertainty About COVID-19 in the Post-truth Era

“…However, such scientific uncertainty becomes more difficult to communicate due to the high risk of mortality and morbidity during a pandemic (Zhai et al, 2020). On the one hand, scientific uncertainty becomes more evident because it not only involves scientific reasoning but also political reasons and decisions that are beyond scientific evaluation, which increases the risk of unforeseen impacts (Guttman and Lev, 2020;Lasser et al, 2020). On the other hand, during a pandemic, the communication of uncertainty has an impact on the management of risks because these can be aggravated or ameliorated by public behavior.…”

“…Corrections are needed not just because the scientific evidence has been proven wrong or false, but because the COVID-19 pandemic is complex in communicational terms. During the COVID-19 crisis, science communication, risk communication, health communication, and political communication come together to produce a challenging mix (Guttman and Lev, 2020;Lasser et al, 2020). Another important reason for continued media efforts to correct information is that the scientific and biomedical evidence about COVID-19 is changing rapidly and constantly.…”