beacon talk - science communication goals and objectives

Thinking about objectives and goals for science communicationJohn C. Besley, Ph.D.Ellis N. Brandt ChairCollege of Communication Arts and Sciences

Our schedule together …12:00-13:00: Goals/objectives discussion13:00-13:45: General discussion

13:00-13:25: Small group discussion13:25-13:45: Large group discussion

My objectives1. You will think about engagement as a strategic

act that involves purposeful choice of long-term

goals and intermediate objectives.

2. You will think about engagement tactics and

skills in terms of whether they can help you

achieve your intermediate objectives.

How many of you have taken part in a “Science Festival”

How many of you have taken part in a “Science Café”

How many of you have taken part in sciencediscussion panel meant for non-scientists

How many of you blog about science?

How many of you tweet about science?

How many of have ever talked to a reporter about science?

How many of you have ever talked to a government official about science?

Engagement is …

Face-to-face

Direct w/policy-makers

Online

Mediated

Engagement is …

Face-to-face

Direct w/policy-makers

Online

Mediated

http://ceblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/brain-system1-system2.jpg

Numbers vary … but scientists clearly engage

• 63% interacted with a journalist in last yearDunwoody and Ryan, 1985

• 70% interacted with a journalist in last 3 yearsPeters, Brossard, de Cheveigné, Dunwoody, 2008

• 51% have ever interacted with journalistAAAS 2015

• 33% engaged directly with policy-makersRoyal Society 2006

• 24% blogged about scienceAAAS 2015

• 13% worked with a science center/museumRoyal Society 2006

Our own AAAS data (2013, n = 388)

• 75% had engaged face-to-face

• 49% had engaged online

• 45% had interacted with the media

• 30% had “other”-wise engaged

*All work done collaboratively with Anthony Dudo, U. Texas

Most science communication training …

• Focuses on writing/speaking skills

• Focuses on honing YOUR message

• Understanding media/political norms

• Focuses on learning to use technology

What happens if you get really good at communicating the wrong stuff?

I don’t mean

bad content…

What does it mean to be an “effective” communicator?

In strategic communication: Effective = Achieving Your Goals

What do you want to ULTIMATELY achieve through public engagement?

(Write it down)

How many of you wrote:• Raise awareness of XYX topic• Teach people about XYZ topic• Correct myths about XYZ topic

• Get people interested in XYZ topic• Build positive image of science

• Get people to think about XYZ topic in a new way

The may be good things … but I do not

think of them as ULTIMATE goals …

• Key question: Why do you

want to “raise awareness,” etc.

How many of you wrote:• Seek a specific policy position (e.g. climate action)

• Seek more funding for science• Seek more freedom for scientific endeavors

• Make the world healthier, wealthier, and wiser• Promote science as a career*

To me … these are the ULTIMATE goals

(*this may be an intermediate objective)

Tactics, objectives, and goals

*Work done collaboratively with Anthony Dudo, U. Texas

Scientists may/should

also have personal

goals (enhance career

and sense of impact)

Channels provide

different

“affordances”

Not every

objective is

equally effective …

Objective: Increase science literacy/awareness

It is true that

science literacy is

low, low, low

Objective: Increase science literacy/awareness

Also true that

nobody knows

much about much

Objective: Increase science literacy/awareness

Knowledge has

only limited impact

on attitudes

Objective: Increase science literacy/awareness

Objective: Increase science literacy/awareness

Knowledge has

only limited impact

on attitudes

Objective: Increase science literacy/awareness

Also lots of

‘information

provision’

experiments

2013 AAAS Scientist Survey: Objectives

4.96

5.34

4.59

5

5.22

4.76

5.59

5.88

5.72

6.04

5.96

5.79

6.14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

messaging goal average (r = .54)

describing … in ways that make them relevant

framing research … {to} resonate …

trust goals average (r = .54)

demonstrating … openness & transparency

hearing what others think …

getting people excited about science

knowledge goals average (r = .41)

ensuring that scientists … are part of …

ensuring that people are informed …

defensive goals average (r = .63)

defending science …

correcting scientific misinformation

Strategic objectives

“How much should each of the following be a priority for online public engagement?”

All questions had a range of 1-7 where 1 was the “lowest priority” and 7 was the “highest priority”

BUT scientists

love the

‘literacy’

objective …

SHARING knowledge will always be a central part of science communication

(But …)

Tactics, objectives, and goals

*Work done collaboratively with Anthony Dudo, U. Texas

If not just

knowledge, what

else can we

focus on?

A few thoughts about ethics

Objective: Build positive views about science/scientists

Those involved in

science have

a generally

positive image?

Objective: Build positive views about science/scientists

Those involved in

science have

a generally

positive image?

Objective: Build positive views about science/scientists

Those involved in

science have

a generally

positive image?

Objective: Build positive views about science/scientists

But there’s

a catch …

You’re seen

as competent

but cold

2013 AAAS Scientist Survey: Objectives

4.96

5.34

4.59

5

5.22

4.76

5.59

5.88

5.72

6.04

5.96

5.79

6.14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

messaging goal average (r = .54)

describing … in ways that make them relevant

framing research … {to} resonate …

trust goals average (r = .54)

demonstrating … openness & transparency

hearing what others think …

getting people excited about science

knowledge goals average (r = .41)

ensuring that scientists … are part of …

ensuring that people are informed …

defensive goals average (r = .63)

defending science …

correcting scientific misinformation

Strategic objectives

“How much should each of the following be a priority for online public engagement?”

All questions had a range of 1-7 where 1 was the “lowest priority” and 7 was the “highest priority”

If warmth is so important, how can scientists be seen as more warm

WARM COLORS

(This a joke)

Face-to-face

Direct w/policy-makers

Online

Mediated

Public Engagement

= Positive Public Interaction

I have questions about

the impact of these …

(Research in progress)

And these too…(Research in progress)

Funny and/or cathartic

Equal effective communication

And these too…(Research in progress)

Tactics, objectives, and goals

*Work done collaboratively with Anthony Dudo, U. Texas

If not just

knowledge, what

else can we

focus on?

Tversksy, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.

Classic work on heuristics …

Tversksy, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.

“Frames are interpretive storylines that set a specific train of thought in motion, communicating why an issue might be a problem, who or what might be responsible for it, and what should be done about it.”

Objective: Put issue in new context (frame)

Nisbet, Matthew C. 2010. "Framing science: A new paradigm in public engagement." In

Communicating Science: New Agendas in Communication, edited by L. A. Kahlor and P. A. Stout, 40-67.

http://sfa.frameworksinstitute.org/

Objective: Put issue in new context (frame)

“Frames are interpretive storylines that set a specific train of thought in motion, communicating why an issue might be a problem, who or what might be responsible for it, and what should be done about it.”

This is really about _______________ and how ____________ is/are responsible for ____________. We therefore need to _____________.

This is really about Bill Gates copied Apple and how Microsoft is responsible for copyright infringement. We therefore need to sue.

Re. How should we think about the origins of the graphical user interface?

This is really about Apple and Microsoft both borrowed an idea from the public conversation (i.e., Xerox) and how no one is responsible for damages. We therefore need to do nothing, except compete.

Framing quiz …

Is it an estate tax or a _______________

Is it oil drilling or ___________________

Is it eavesdropping or _______________

Is it global warming or _______________

Is it a used car or a __________________

Is it a secretary or a __________________

Is it gay marriage or __________________

Is it anti-abortion or __________________

Is it pro-abortion or __________________

Is it impotence or ____________________

If you’re against a union or for ______________

It’s not single-payer medicine it’s ___________

You’re not an environmentalist you’re a ______

I’m not a liberal I’m a _____________________

It’s not a regulation it’s a __________________

Others???

Episodic vs. Thematic Framing

Episodic vs. Thematic Framing

Objective: Put issue in new context (frame)

Re. Gay Marriage?

Objective: Put issue in new context (frame)

Backlash to “security” frame

Framing doesn’t

always work as

planned …

2013 AAAS Scientist Survey: Objectives

4.96

5.34

4.59

5

5.22

4.76

5.59

5.88

5.72

6.04

5.96

5.79

6.14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

messaging goal average (r = .54)

describing … in ways that make them relevant

framing research … {to} resonate …

trust goals average (r = .54)

demonstrating … openness & transparency

hearing what others think …

getting people excited about science

knowledge goals average (r = .41)

ensuring that scientists … are part of …

ensuring that people are informed …

defensive goals average (r = .63)

defending science …

correcting scientific misinformation

Strategic objectives

“How much should each of the following be a priority for online public engagement?”

All questions had a range of 1-7 where 1 was the “lowest priority” and 7 was the “highest priority”

Finally: What does it mean to know your “audience” (= “interlocutors”)?

Tactics, objectives, and goals

What do they want to hear?

What might they want to say?

What do they think/feel about you?

How are they thinking about issues?

But don’t forget …

What are YOU trying to achieve?

What is the ethical path

to achieving it?

Exercise ... Logic model/Theories of change

We will you do:___________

It will lead to:___________

It will lead to:___________

It will lead to:___________

The impact will be:___________

The impact will be:___________

What skills do we need: ___________________What resources do we need: _______________What’s the first step: ______________________How does this fit our needs: ________________How does this fit our values: _______________ How will you know if you succeed: __________

+

Final thoughts I …

There are no

silver bullets

Not everyone

is reachableIt takes time

Final thoughts II …

It might be okay to

have a friend

photograph your

wedding …

But sometimes

help is … helpful.

And there’s no

need to reinvent

the wheel …

To evaluate the talk: https://goo.gl/opna16