Responsibility and science communication: scientists’ experiences of and perspectives on public communication activities

Loroño-Leturiondo, Maria; Davies, Sarah R.

doi:10.1080/23299460.2018.1434739

Cited by 27 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Salmon, Priestley and Goven [2017] encourage scientists to become "a 'reflexive scientist', one who is familiar with critical Public Engagement with Science (PES) literature; thoughtful and clear about the goal of his or her public engagement activities; and capable of critically analysing the relation between those activities and the politics of his or her own field, the relevant institutional context, and his or her own personal assumptions" [Salmon, Priestley and Goven, 2017, p. 66]. Recently, research has been done into scientists' perspective on their role and factors that determine willingness to engage in (online) science communication or public engagement activities [Besley, Dudo et al, 2018;Davies, 2021;Davies and Hara, 2017;Dudo and Besley, 2016;Loroño-Leturiondo and Davies, 2018;Miah, 2017]. However, these studies raise the need of further conceptualization of the experiences and perspectives of scientists on the use of digital media -for the production, consumption and analysis of these online interactions is complex and involves both insights into individual perspectives as well as systemic, contextual, cultural, political and ethical dimensions [Davies, 2021].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Who is going to believe me, if I say ‘I'm a researcher?’” — Scientists' role repertoires in online public engagement

Roedema¹,

Broerse²,

Kupper³

2021

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article contributes to reflective practice amongst scientists who engage with citizens in the digital public sphere, by exploring the scientists' experiences and underlying perspectives on their role repertoires in online science-society interactions. Semi-structured interviews were held with 26 European scientists to investigate their focus and contribution in boundary interactions, perspective on appropriate model of science communication, and activities, outputs and addressees in the digital public sphere — together comprising a role repertoire. The intended role of scientists often did not match with their deployed repertoire in online interactions with citizens. Participants were left with the feeling that the digital public sphere provides hollow interactions, devaluates scientific expertise or even represents a hostile environment. In order to capitalise on the promise of the digital public sphere for constructive interactions with a diverse public, a reflective practice is needed that aligns scientists' intended contribution to science-society interactions with the scientists' perspective and deployed online repertoires.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Who is going to believe me, if I say ‘I'm a researcher?’” — Scientists' role repertoires in online public engagement

Roedema¹,

Broerse²,

Kupper³

2021

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a similar vein, the wider audience is assessed as irrational and exploitable by special interest groups (Small and Mallon 2007;Young and Matthews 2007;Besley and Nisbet 2013). Accordingly, the chief idea which researchers associate with public involvement is science education or the dissemination of information (Peters et al 2009;Bührer et al 2017;Loroño-Leturiondo and Davies 2018). By contrast, stakeholder involvement is viewed as enhancing relevance and impact of research (Smallman, Komme, and Faullimmel 2015;Bührer et al 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Responsible research and innovation: hopes and fears in the scientific community in Europe

Carrier

Gartzlaff

2019

Journal of Responsible Innovation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conducted interviews among some 80 researchers and research executives on their understanding of and their attitudes toward 'Responsible Research and Innovation' (RRI). The relevant notion of RRI concerns granting influence on research projects to the general public and stakeholders ('science with society'), for one, or focusing research on the common good ('science for society'), for another. We identified a welcoming attitude regarding RRI in the scientific community, but also worries that should be heeded in any effort to implement RRI. Concerns arise with respect to fears of ignorance and bias of societal agents, the loss of the autonomy of science, the neglect of basic research by RRI procedures, the difficulty to anticipate research outcomes and their social impact as well as the additional expenditure required by engaging with societal actors. Such worries provide information about obstacles in the scientific community and thus suggest ways of structuring acceptable RRI schemes.

show abstract

“…a responsibility or obligation), rather than trying to accomplish any specific behavior. This is another somewhat of an abstract goal, but it also reflects a portion of the discussion that seems to occur around why scholars should devote resources to engagement (Horst, 2013; Loroño-Leturiondo and Davies, 2018). Underlying this idea seems to be a recognition that a substantial portion of academic research is funded by public monies (i.e.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring scholars’ public engagement goals in Canada and the United States

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have little systematic knowledge about scholars’ goals for public engagement in the academic literature. This study therefore provides a secondary analysis of two surveys of scholars that included closed-ended questions about goals. One survey from 2017 was from a sample of Canadian grant recipients from a federal science funding agency, while the second survey from 2018 comes from a sample of professors at top American research universities. The focus of this research is on both presenting novel data about scholars’ expressed goals and exploring the relationships between these goals and potential predictors of these goals, including demographics, past engagement behavior, and overall views about public engagement. Areas for future research are then described.

show abstract

Responsibility and science communication: scientists’ experiences of and perspectives on public communication activities

Cited by 27 publications

References 28 publications

“Who is going to believe me, if I say ‘I'm a researcher?’” — Scientists' role repertoires in online public engagement

“Who is going to believe me, if I say ‘I'm a researcher?’” — Scientists' role repertoires in online public engagement

Responsible research and innovation: hopes and fears in the scientific community in Europe

Exploring scholars’ public engagement goals in Canada and the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About