Motivations and deterrents in contemporary science communication: a questionnaire survey of actors in seven European countries

Science Communication practices and Trust in information sources amongst Nigerian scientists and journalists

“…One scientist also reported working as a policy officer. This multiplicity of roles was also found in a European study [Wilkinson et al, 2023] and may reflect changing expectations of and opportunities available to researchers, as well as changes in the broader media landscape that affect journalists. The range of roles undertaken by our respondents, combined with the wide range of communication activities reported by respondents suggest a group of researchers who are more committed to public engagement than those explored by Ndlovu et al [2016], and with experiences closer to those reported in the U.K. [Hamlyn et al, 2015].…”

“…This study adopted a quantitative approach to investigate the motivations and barriers faced by health researchers and journalists. Drawing on previously validated survey tools [Ridgway, Milani, Weitkamp & Wilkinson, 2020;Wilkinson et al, 2023], a survey was developed to investigate the research questions. The survey was distributed in paper form at a training workshop for health researchers and journalists held in Abuja, Nigeria in 15-16 October, 2019.…”

“…A global survey of science journalists suggests that informing and educating are prominent motivations [Bauer, Howard, Romo Ramos, Massarani & Amorim, 2013]. Looking more broadly at science communicators, Wilkinson, Milani, Ridgway and Weitkamp [2023] indicate that personal enthusiasm, education and countering misinformation featured as motivators across several European countries. This study also explored barriers to communication, finding lack of time or resources and challenges in gaining participation from others as key issues.…”

Exploring ‘quality’ in science communication online: Expert thoughts on how to assess and promote science communication quality in digital media contexts

“…Working with such an approach seems appropriate given the diversity of science communication online. An orientation towards meta-criteria also accommodates the fact that science communication works at the intersection of science and society and that actors involved hold a wide variety of norms, motives and orientations ( Wilkinson et al, 2021 ).…”

What keeps them involved? An exploratory study of scientists’ participation mechanisms in science communication in China

“…Most human behaviours involve complex psychological activities, including the consideration of various internal and external factors. Studies have shown that whether scientists participate in science communication is related to the following factors: their interests (Clare et al, 2023), sense of responsibility and enthusiasm for science and the attitudes of their significant others (Martín-Sempere et al, 2008); their media use habits (Dudo, 2013); their occupational status, media literacy and the predictable returns of such participation (Dunwoody et al, 2009); their disciplines (Peters et al, 2008); their organizations (Marcinkowski et al, 2014); their perceptions of subjective norms (Chen et al, 2023), media and media audiences (Jin et al, 2018; Tsfati et al, 2011); their self-efficacy, expression ability, participation experiences and chance (Bentley and Kyvik, 2011; Besley and Dudo, 2017; Poliakoff and Webb, 2007); and culture and institutions (Zhang, 2015).…”