Strategic Communication, Department of Social Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Philosophy, Department of Social Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2022 Dec 1;17(12):e0277677. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277677. eCollection 2022.
The field of science communication has grown considerably over the past decade, and so have the number of scientific writings on what science communication is and how it should be practiced. The multitude of theoretisations and models has led to a lack of clarity in defining science communication, and to a highly popularised-and theorised-rhetorical shift from deficit to dialogue and participation. With this study, we aim to remediate the absence of research into what science communication is, for scientists themselves. We also investigate whether the transition towards dialogue and participation is reflected in the goals scientists identify as important to their science communication efforts, both in a general and a social media context. For this, we analyse survey data collected from scientists in the Netherlands using thematic qualitative analysis and statistical analysis. Our results reveal six main dimensions of science communication as defined by our respondents. The 584 definitions we analyse demonstrate a focus on a one-way process of transmission and translation of scientific results and their impacts towards a lay audience, via mostly traditional media channels, with the goals of making science more accessible, of educating audiences, and of raising awareness about science. In terms of the goals identified as most important by scientists in the Netherlands, we find goals aligned with the deficit and dialogue models of science communication to be the most important. Overall, our findings suggest we should be cautious in the face of recent claims that we live in a new era of dialogue, transparency, and participation in the realm of science communication.
过去十年间，科学传播领域发展迅速，有关科学传播是什么以及应该如何实践的科学文献也层出不穷。大量的理论化和模型化导致科学传播的定义不够清晰，并导致了一种从缺陷到对话和参与的高度流行化和理论化的修辞转变。本研究旨在弥补科学界对自身科学传播研究的缺失。我们还调查了向对话和参与的转变是否反映在科学家确定的对其科学传播工作重要的目标中，无论是在一般意义上还是在社交媒体背景下。为此，我们使用主题定性分析和统计分析，分析了从荷兰科学家那里收集的调查数据。我们的研究结果揭示了科学家定义的科学传播的六个主要维度。我们分析的 584 个定义表明，重点是通过传统媒体渠道将科学结果及其对公众的影响单向传递和转化，目标是使科学更易于理解，教育受众，并提高公众对科学的认识。就荷兰科学家认为最重要的目标而言，我们发现与科学传播的缺陷和对话模式相一致的目标最为重要。总的来说，我们的研究结果表明，面对最近有关科学传播领域存在新的对话、透明和参与时代的说法，我们应该保持谨慎。
