Roles, incentives, training and audiences for science communication: perspectives from female science communicators

Wilkinson, Clare; Milani, Elena; Ridgway, Andy; Weitkamp, Emma

doi:10.22323/2.21040204

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results shed light on the motivations driving “behind-the-scenes” sci-comm work for Australian life sciences organisations and the demographics undertaking this work. The majority of respondents to our survey were female early-career researchers working at a university, corroborating previous studies that found science communication is a feminised field composed of younger researchers (Abi Ghannam, 2015; Rasekoala, 2019; Wilkinson et al ., 2022). Though we did not undertake formal statistical analysis to examine the survey results presented here, a greater number of female participants were involved in supportive tasks such as social media management, whereas male participants were predominantly in paid roles, including the single journal editor surveyed.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Though we did not undertake formal statistical analysis to examine the survey results presented here, a greater number of female participants were involved in supportive tasks such as social media management, whereas male participants were predominantly in paid roles, including the single journal editor surveyed. This supports the notion that, broadly speaking, science communication can be separated into two narratives: work undertaken by women in service or communal roles, as seen here, and work undertaken by men representing themselves as individuals in public speaking contexts (Johnson, Ecklund and Lincoln, 2014; Wilkinson et al ., 2022).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…Women are often invisible in the service role of doing sci-comm on behalf of organisations, often overshadowed by the organisation’s brand rather than recognised under their own name. In contrast, men often present themselves as individual science communicators via blog posts or YouTube channels, resulting in their overrepresentation on social media platforms compared to within their respective scientific discipline (Amarasekara and Grant, 2019; Wilkinson et al ., 2022). Thus, women engaged in sci-comm work are more likely to receive informal sanctions in the workplace discouraging them from doing such work relative to their male counterparts, and may also be judged more harshly by the general public based on their attitude or appearance (Johnson, Ecklund and Lincoln, 2014; McKinnon and O’Connell, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Sci-comm “behind the scenes”: Gendered narratives of scientific outreach activities in the life sciences

Beasley-Hall,

Papadelos,

Hewitt

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science communication, or sci-comm, is a broad term describing activities seeking to increase scientific literacy. Sci-comm has a positive impact on perceptions of science, public policy, public scientific literacy, and career choices of future scientists. Yet, sci-comm is often viewed as at odds with, or tangential, to academic achievement, as non-scientific, or as less worthy a time commitment compared to internal communication in academia. In Australia, scientific societies and organisations engage in a range of activities underpinned by communal, or so-called "behind-the-scenes", sci-comm work by individuals done almost exclusively on a voluntary basis. Given an apparent undervaluing of sci-comm work in academia, we established a pilot study to investigate who does this work, in what capacity, and why. A semi-structured online survey was administered to 88 Australian life sciences organisations for dissemination to their members, and 49 responses were received. Respondents were mostly women in early-career researcher positions at universities. Participants almost universally agreed that their sci-comm contributions to organisations were not beneficial to career progression. Some participants suggested that this perception might stem from it being perceived as feminised or categorised as "care work", potentially resulting in its undervaluation. However, most also cited a range of personal and professional benefits gained from the work, including giving back to the general public and scientific community, and developing skills relevant to translating scientific research. The majority of survey respondents indicated that they were likely to continue such work in the future. Gaining a deeper understanding of the motivations behind, and perceptions of, behind-the-scenes sci-comm work will aid in overcoming barriers that disproportionately affect women, and promote better acknowledgement and recognition of their contributions in the future.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sci-comm “behind the scenes”: Gendered narratives of scientific outreach activities in the life sciences

Beasley-Hall,

Papadelos,

Hewitt

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In their study, Wilkinson et al [2022] focus on the practices and motivations of science communicators in seven European countries: Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Serbia, Sweden and the UK. Across these countries, the authors find that although women and men practice science communication with similar frequency, there are indications that women tend to be found in more supporting and assisting roles in science communication, whereas men tend to be found in more senior and high-status roles.…”

Section: Inclusivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Inclusion, reflection and co-creation: responsible science communication across the globe

Achiam¹,

Kupper²,

Roche³

2022

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science communication is at the heart of many of the challenges our societies face today. At the same time, on-going changes in the relationship between science and society and the digitalisation of society can make science communication itself into a complex challenge. How can science communication adapt to an ever-changing landscape and take on new roles? In this issue we explore the potential of ‘responsible science communication’ to support and develop meaningful, open and trustworthy relationships between science and society. We present a selection of papers that review three crucial dimensions of ‘responsible science communication: reflexivity, inclusivity and co-creation’. Integrating theory and practice, this issue advocates that researchers and practitioners should be mindful of these dimensions to create meaningful conversations about science and our future.

show abstract

Can social media combat gender inequalities in academia? Measuring the prevalence of the Matilda effect in communication

Song,

Wang,

2023

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study sought to investigate whether scholarly impact and academic influence differ between men and women in the field of communication and the extent to which the gender gap has persisted on social media platforms, an arena increasingly used for research dissemination. Data were collected from 10,736 articles, published in prominent communication journals between 2012 and 2022, using a combination of three sources: OpenAlex, Altmetric, and Twitter. The gender of 6,827 first authors was identified using ChatGPT, with an accuracy of 0.94. The findings confirmed the presence of the Matilda effect, indicating a bias toward male scholars in terms of research performance, academic mobility, and online popularity. Furthermore, the study revealed uneven gains between male and female scholars in their use of social media for research dissemination. These results have implications for how science communities can effectively promote research on social media.

show abstract

Roles, incentives, training and audiences for science communication: perspectives from female science communicators

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Sci-comm “behind the scenes”: Gendered narratives of scientific outreach activities in the life sciences

Sci-comm “behind the scenes”: Gendered narratives of scientific outreach activities in the life sciences

Inclusion, reflection and co-creation: responsible science communication across the globe

Can social media combat gender inequalities in academia? Measuring the prevalence of the Matilda effect in communication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About