Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe relationship between scientists and journalists has evolved in recent years with the advent of numerous sociocultural changes and drastic shifts within the media ecosystem. Media professionals have traditionally been the gatekeepers of scientific information, but new media technologies grant scientists more power than ever before to be proactive about their public communication. In this article, I provide an overview of the science–media relationship and scientists as public communicators. Specifically, I recount the relationship that has traditionally existed between scientists and media professionals, explain how this relationship has evolved over recent years, and highlight what I believe are some of the most salient and exciting areas for future research examining scientists' efforts to engage with the public.

This study aims to contribute to our empirical understanding of the factors and processes that lead scientists to engage in public communication. Using a national sample, this study identifies key factors that contribute to scientists' public communication activity, including a scientist's status, communication autonomy, use of print and online media, intrinsic rewards, communication training, perceived behavioral controls, normative beliefs, and perceived level of medialization. In addition to these findings, this study aims to extend our understanding of the popularization process by injecting theoretical rationale, accounting for indirect pathways of influence, and proposing a baseline model that can be refined over time.

1. A story about stories in strategic communication / Michael Dahlstrom -- 2. Strategic storytelling : narrative messaging in entertainment and emergent media / Heather L. LaMarre -- 3. The promise of participatry media : identifying the potential roles of influential content generators in prosocial strategic communication / Kajsa E. Dalrymple and Rachel Young -- 4. The social nature of online media and its effects on behaviors and attitudes / Ashley A. Anderson -- 5. How we talk and why it matters / Myiah Hutchens -- 6. Strategic communication and U.S. national security affairs : critical-cultural and rhetorical perspectives / Hamilton Bean -- 7.Marketer-consumer language cooperation in strategic communication / Ann Kronrod -- 8. How marketing communications influence the formation of food habits prior to adulthood / Anna McAlister -- 9. Social media and crisis communication : explicating the social-mediated crisis communication model / Lucinda Austin and Yan Jin

In the United States and many other large media markets, science journalism has experienced major structural shifts that have resulted in the profession largely being conducted by nonspecialists and freelancers who cope with an abundance of misinformation and a loss of public confidence. In this qualitative work, we present the results of in-depth interviews with science journalists to understand current struggles and motivations for producing science news. Despite structural challenges and occupational burnout, journalists are motivated to produce science news for their perceived social benefits. However, many of the ways they are left to cope with these issues are personal strategies (e.g., resilience) that are unsustainable and ignore systemic inequities.

AbstractThis essay argues that we should treat science and risk communicators' choices about tactics, objectives, and goals as behaviors to advance both research and practice. Doing so allows for a discussion about how to use theories about behavior change and trust‐building to help foster more strategic communication choices. The essay also seeks to anticipate and respond to potential arguments against using behavior change theories to encourage more strategic communication choices. We argue that it is possible to use behavior change tactics ethically if those tactics are aimed at increasing the likelihood that all participants in communication—including decisions makers like risk scientists—meaningfully engage with true, relevant information. Under the right conditions, such engagement is what should allow for the development of new knowledge, as well as a range of evidence‐based evaluative beliefs, feelings, and frames. Being strategic when making choices about communication should also help with identifying situations in which justice, equity, diversity, or inclusion issues require additional attention. The essay concludes by noting that the difficulty of efficient and effective science and risk communication may require increased emphasis on getting experts such as scientists to collaborate with expert communication advisors. It may also be necessary to increase the capacity of science‐ and risk‐focused communication practitioners.

Science communication spaces may provide an antidote to the hostility of graduate academic spaces. Using the conceptual lens of science identity, we interviewed North American-based STEM graduate students about their sense of belonging in these spaces. Our results suggest that many science communication spaces welcome a plurality of alternative science identities, while academic spaces require assimilation into a singular research science identity. These results suggest how science communication organizations might more intentionally cultivate spaces of belonging for scientists-in-training.

Mediated messages can influence awareness and nascent perceptions of novel or new issues. Nanotechnology is one such issue. This study explores descriptive and thematic characteristics of journalistic coverage of nanotechnology over a twenty-year span using computer-aided content analysis, finding an emphasis on research throughout the period with an increasing focus on both business and health aspects of nanotechnology. Later stories are more likely to address potential risks, while the regulatory dimensions, environmental implications, and uncertainty inherent in this emerging technology remain largely unaddressed.

This study investigates scientists as public communicators, with a particular focus on factors that influence scientists' interactions with the mass media. Based on a U.S. survey of scientists, the results show that some of the patterns characterizing these interactions have remained remarkably stable over the course of at least three decades. Scientists continue to interact with journalists more frequently than commonly assumed, and status, socialization, and positive intrinsic rewards are all positively associated with higher frequencies of media contact.

This study identifies key characteristics of current science communication training programs based in North America. We report findings from semistructured interviews conducted with science communication trainers ( N = 32) that examined programs' curricula, trainees, and impacts. Findings suggest that the current landscape of science communication training is one where a range of well-intentioned individuals and groups provide guidance to mostly self-selecting scientists. Training typically involves helping scientists find and refine their own message and then expecting these individuals to find their own opportunities to communicate. Programs commonly emphasize technical communication skills more than strategy, rarely conduct robust evaluation, and are not typically designed to enhance inclusivity. Researcher-trainer partnerships can help maximize the reach and positive impacts of these programs.

Studies that investigate how the mass media cover risk issues often assume that certain characteristics of content are related to specific risk perceptions and behavioral intentions. However, these relationships have seldom been empirically assessed. This study tests the influence of three message‐level media variables—risk precision information, sensational information, and self‐efficacy information—on perceptions of risk, individual worry, and behavioral intentions toward a pervasive health risk. Results suggest that more precise risk information leads to increased risk perceptions and that the effect of sensational information is moderated by risk precision information. Greater self‐efficacy information is associated with greater intention to change behavior, but none of the variables influence individual worry. The results provide a quantitative understanding of how specific characteristics of informational media content can influence individuals' responses to health threats of a global and uncertain nature.

Given the proliferation of video games and their potential to contribute to informal science learning and perception formation, we provide an assessment of how commercial video games portray technoscience. Our examination was guided by theories commonly applied in studies of entertainment media's contributions to public understanding of science. Results indicate that technoscience and its practitioners are common fixtures within video games and that their presence is often conspicuous and enthusiastic. Our findings challenge common assumptions about the treatment of science in media and compel research examining the role of informal gaming in cultivating future generations of scientists.

While quality mediated information does not guarantee accurate public risk perceptions, it provides the public with the means to construct informed risk assessments. This study analyzed four major U.S. newspapers to assess the quality of coverage related to risks posed by avian flu. "Quality of coverage" was examined with a five-dimension conceptualization that included measures of risk magnitude, self-efficacy, risk comparisons, sensationalism, and thematic and episodic framing. Findings revealed that coverage was dominated by episodic frames, exhibited high sensationalism, and contained minimal information promoting self-efficacy. Conversely, coverage exhibited high quality in terms of risk magnitude and risk comparison information.

A set of parallel surveys of scientists from multiple scientific societies finds that the most consistent predictors of willingness to take part in engagement activities with the public are a belief that she or he will enjoy the experience (attitude), make a difference through engagement (response efficacy), and has the time to engage. Age, sex, scientific field, what a scientist thinks about the public, perceived personal engagement skill (self-efficacy), and what a scientist thinks about her or his colleagues (normative beliefs) are inconsistent predictors. Research may be needed to find how to shape scientists' engagement views in ways that are both effective and acceptable.

The careful choice of tactics—such as specific messages, styles, channels, or sources—is how strategic science communicators ensure that the time and money going into communication results in intended changes to chosen audiences' beliefs, feelings, and frames, as well as associated behaviors. Using a sample of scientists from American research universities ( N = 516), we assess scientists' willingness to use 11 different communication tactics and the relationship between these tactics and potential predictors. We find that scientists are open to a range of communication tactics. Practical and theoretical implications for science communication are discussed.