AISL PI Meeting Poster

.

• Complete surveys, consolidate data and analyze (multiple presentations and manuscripts planned)• Project website nearing completion; includes

accessible summaries of key objective research• New grant submission focused on extending

survey work and building community of trainers

PROJECT GOALS AND RESULTS

CONCEPTUAL UNDERPINNING NEXT STEPS

Acknowledgements

The goal of this project is to understand how scientists think about public engagement with a focus on the objectives they see as being achievable through science communication. This knowledge will be used to connect and advance science communication theory and practice.

Year 1 Activities(Fall 2014-Fall 2015) : • Qualitative interviews with science

communication trainers• Preparing for online surveys of scientists

from multiple societiesYear 2 Activities (Fall 2015-Fall 2016):• Online survey of scientists• Project website development

BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Collaborative Research: Scientists’ Views of the Public, Public Engagement, and Public Engagement GoalsPI: John C. Besley, Ph.D.Michigan State University

PI: Anthony D. Dudo, Ph.D.University of Texas

Graduate Students: Shupei YuanMichigan State University

Niveen Abi Ghannam, Ph.D.Hyeseung KohUniversity of Texas

Interviews with science communication trainers• Completed 24 interviews with trainers

in the US and Canada (~30-45 minutes)Key findings …• Trainers believe societal and personal goals

drive scientists engagement activities• Social goal include either general support for

science or support for specific policy choices• Journalists focus primarily on skills training• There appears to be very limited focus on:

(a) setting goals and interim objectives aimed at achieving those goals; and(b) talking about the degree to which some potential objectives may not help reach goals

Conclusions …• May be worth having discussion about

the role of objective/goal setting in training• Not clear that the research base linking

engagement activities (e.g., blogging, science festivaling, etc.) to objectives (e.g., knowledge, trust, identification, etc.) to goals (e.g., support) is as accessible to trainers as it needs to be

Example Deliverables • Presentations at the February 2015 meeting of

the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the December 2015 meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis•Manuscript in revision + short summary is online

Thank you to Sharon Dunwoody, Bruce Lewenstein, and Meena Selvakumar (advisory panel), as well as Jeanne Braha at AAAS, for their support and guidance on this work.

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF, Grant AISL 14241214-421723. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.

Surveys of scientists• 15 minute online surveys of scientists on views

about public engagement and engagement objectives and goals

Complete/In progress• American Association for the Advancement of

Science (n = 1,064); American Society for Microbiology (n = 1,111); American Geophysical Union (in progress); American Chemical Society (in progress)

Scheduled for March/April• Environmental Studies Association, Geological

Society of American; American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology; American Political Science Association; science communication scholars (based on publications)

Example Deliverables • Presentation at the February 2016 meeting of

the American Association for the Advancement of Science; additional presentations planned

Face-to-Face

Media

Direct

Online

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

34

45

58

59

13

19

14

5

30

25

19

14

Never Once 2-5 times 6-11 times About once a month Multiple times per month Once a week or more

“To start, about how often have you engaged with the public on science in the last year?” Example survey results from Fall 2015 AAAS Survey (n = 1,064)

• Objectives and goals included in interviews and surveys were identified by a literature review, and discussing with the science communication research and training communities

• Survey is based on adaption of the Theory of Planned Behavior• Scientists asked about attitudes

toward objectives, perceived norms associated with objectives, and efficacy beliefs related to objectives• Detailed demographic and

career data also collected• Initial analyses suggests all

TPB variables are associated with objective prioritization