Dudo Anthony, Besley John C
Stan Richards School of Advertising & Public Relations, Moody College of Communication, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Dept. of Advertising & Public Relations, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 25;11(2):e0148867. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148867. eCollection 2016.
Amid calls from scientific leaders for their colleagues to become more effective public communicators, this study examines the objectives that scientists' report drive their public engagement behaviors. We explore how scientists evaluate five specific communication objectives, which include informing the public about science, exciting the public about science, strengthening the public's trust in science, tailoring messages about science, and defending science from misinformation. We use insights from extant research, the theory of planned behavior, and procedural justice theory to identify likely predictors of scientists' views about these communication objectives. Results show that scientists most prioritize communication designed to defend science from misinformation and educate the public about science, and least prioritize communication that seeks to build trust and establish resonance with the public. Regression analyses reveal factors associated with scientists who prioritize each of the five specific communication objectives. Our findings highlight the need for communication trainers to help scientists select specific communication objectives for particular contexts and audiences.
在科学领袖呼吁其同行成为更有效的公众传播者之际,本研究考察了科学家们报告的驱动其公众参与行为的目标。我们探讨科学家如何评估五个具体的传播目标,包括向公众宣传科学、激发公众对科学的兴趣、增强公众对科学的信任、调整有关科学的信息以及抵御科学错误信息。我们运用现有研究、计划行为理论和程序正义理论的见解,来确定科学家对这些传播目标看法的可能预测因素。结果表明,科学家最重视旨在抵御科学错误信息并向公众普及科学的传播,最不重视旨在与公众建立信任并产生共鸣的传播。回归分析揭示了与优先考虑五个具体传播目标中每一个目标的科学家相关的因素。我们的研究结果凸显了传播培训师帮助科学家针对特定背景和受众选择具体传播目标的必要性。