Science Communication and Public Engagement:Major Models and Approaches

@MCNisbet #NASInterface

Matthew C. NisbetAssociate ProfessorSchool of CommunicationAmerican University Washington D.C.

Sustainable Infrastructures for Life Science CommunicationNational Academies, Washington DC 12.09.13

www.climateshiftproject.org/NASinterface

The Popularization and Dissemination Model

@MCNisbet

Engages a core audience of science enthusiasts who can comment, share, and repurpose.

Can reach through incidental exposure non-attentive, broader publics.

Can shape the decisions and thinking of policymakers, journalists and funders.

For scientists, can build personal brand, increase citation impact, influence scientific peers, and develop skills and experience.

Popularization & The Cycle of Hype

@MCNisbet

Emphasis by funding agencies on broader impacts puts pressure on scientists and institutions to “oversell” their findings.

Media coverage emphasizes near term societal benefits and market development with less emphasis on uncertainty and possible risks.

Hype risks credibility and trust in science and may undermine ability to do basic research.

Increasingly defines science and higher education in terms of economic development and job growth.

More Scientific Knowledge = More Disagreement?

@MCNisbet

More Carl Sagans?Social Identity and Communication

@MCNisbet

Scientists’ Faulty Intuition:Shared Identity, Information Sources & Assumptions

@MCNisbet

The Strategic Communication ModelMessaging By Audience Segment and By Way of Opinion Leaders

@MCNisbet

Audience Segmentation, Framing & Opinion Leaders:Climate Change and Biomedical Research

@MCNisbet

Strategic Communication Campaigns: Frictions and Trade-Offs

@MCNisbet

Raises questions about conflict of interest and manipulation.

Difficulty coordinating message strategy across groups and organizations.

Often serves to increase polarization and divisions. Increased targeting = increased echo chambers.

Does strategic communication lead to effective policy?

Under what conditions does broader public matter to policymaking?

Defines public as spectators, consumers or voters but not as active participants in decisions.

Public Engagement and Dialogue Model:Deliberative Forums, Public Meetings, Digital News Forums

@MCNisbet

Seeks to “democratize” the governance of science and technology.

Can enhance civic capacity of regions, creating opportunities to debate and collaborate.

Can increase participant trust and knowledge, soften group differences and polarization.

Informs policy options, adapts knowledge to localized contexts or specialized cases.

Questions regarding representativeness and reach, giving visibility to minority views, or criticized as just another “public relations” strategy.

Worldwide Views on Biodiversity

@MCNisbet

Stakeholder Driven Science and Lay Expertise Model

@MCNisbet

Research that effectively addresses the needs of society requires “co-production” with public.

Emphasis on research that is useable, problem solving and socially acceptable; aligning research efforts with national, state or local needs.

Promotes enhanced trust, appreciation and support for research institution among public, stakeholders and policymakers.

Can be time consuming, resource intensive, “messy,” does not fit easily with traditional collaboration, publication and credit model.

www.ClimateShiftProject.org/NASInterface

@MCNisbet