Padova, 2 ottobre 2014

The Crisis of Mediators? The Crisis of Mediators? Science Communication in the Digital AgeScience Communication in the Digital Age

Massimiano Bucchi STS Programme

Dept. of Sociology, Università di Trento

Good old days….(?)Good old days….(?)

Good old days….(?)Good old days….(?)

IntraspecialisticStage

InterspecialisticStage

PedagogicalStage

PopularStage

The ‘third mission’ pushThe ‘third mission’ push

• European Charter for Researchers and Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers:Researchers should ensure that their research activities are made known to society at large in such a way that they can be understood by non-specialists, thereby improving the public’s understanding of science. Direct engagement with the public will help researchers to better understand public interest in priorities for science and technology and also the public’s concerns (2005).

Public engagement describes the myriad of ways in which the activity and benefits of higher education and research can be shared with the public. Engagement is by definition a two-way process, involving interaction and listening, with the goal of generating mutual benefit. (NCCPE, UK)

http://www.publicengagement.ac.uk

Observa is an independent, non profit, legally recognized research centre set up in 2001, promoting

the study and discussion of the interaction among science,

technology and society, with the aim of stimulating dialogue among

researchers, policy makers and citizens.

Information, Publications, News and Research Reportswww.observa.it

www.scienceinsociety.euwww.scienceinsociety.eu

Trustworthiness of science Trustworthiness of science information sourcesinformation sources

Trend 2008-2012 (%; 2008: n=996; 2012: n=995).

Highly/quite trustworthy

Little/Not trustworthy

DK

2008 2012 2008 2012 2008 2012

Public lectures by researchers 65,4 72,4 19,8 23,2 14,8 4,4

Popular science magazines 66,8 72,2 18,8 23,1 14,4 4,7

Research institutions websites 47,9 66,4 21,1 20,8 31,0 12,8

TV science programmes 72,4 69,5 22,2 29,7 5,4 1,2

Researchers’ blogs 44,9 63,1 24,1 27,6 31,0 12,8

Newspapers’ S&T pages 55,4 55,2 35,2 40,4 9,4 4,4

Radio science programmes 42,9 48,1 23,6 35,0 33,5 16,9

Most trustworthy web sourcesMost trustworthy web sources

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

DK

Other online encyclopedias

Blogs/forums for public discussion

Websites of the major nationalnewspapers

Wikipedia

Websites of research institutes

18,6

7,6

8,4

16,9

17,1

31,5

Web sources considered more credible to find information about current issues related to science and technology (%; 2010: n=985).

Communicating ‘Science in action’?Communicating ‘Science in action’?

Communicating ‘Science in action’?Communicating ‘Science in action’?

Technoscience ‘direct to consumer’Technoscience ‘direct to consumer’??

Science according to personal tastes?Science according to personal tastes?

PCST 2.0 and the challenge of qualityPCST 2.0 and the challenge of quality

Dominant Communication model

Key actors Relation between specialist/public communication levels

Quality assurance devices

PCST 1.0

Mediated /Filtered

Mediators, sometime scientists (Journalists/professional communicators, popularization channels, Science Museums)

Vertical, sequential

Editorial Brand / Channel Reputation

PCST 2.0

Direct to Consumer

Research institutions, Scientists, Digital Media Corporations

Horizontal, simultaneous, overlapping

???

Proposed indicators for public engagement with Proposed indicators for public engagement with strengths and weaknessesstrengths and weaknesses

Fonte: VA Report 2011 «Public engagement. International review, analysis and proposals on indicators for measuring public engagement», http://v-a.se

Indicators of PE activities obtained from the surveyIndicators of PE activities obtained from the survey(da Neresini-Bucchi, 2011)(da Neresini-Bucchi, 2011)

Distribution of research institutions’ PE performances on the basis of Distribution of research institutions’ PE performances on the basis of absolute rating AR (range = 0–17; mean = 7.7; SD = 2.8) and relative absolute rating AR (range = 0–17; mean = 7.7; SD = 2.8) and relative

rating RR (range = 0–13; mean = 5.7; SD = 1.9)rating RR (range = 0–13; mean = 5.7; SD = 1.9)(da Neresini-Bucchi, 2011)(da Neresini-Bucchi, 2011)

In the past three years, have you had professional contacts with In the past three years, have you had professional contacts with journalists from the general mass media face-to-face, by phone, or by journalists from the general mass media face-to-face, by phone, or by

mail/fax/e-mail? mail/fax/e-mail? (%) (%)

What kinds of contact have you had with the media? (% of Yes, among those who have had contacts)

Been interviewed by

a journalist

Provided background

information for a popular article or program in the

media

Been a guest on a TV or radio panel

discussion or talk show

Italy 72 54 17France 60 42 25Germany 63 47 23Japan 67 32 17UK 60 43 26USA 66 46 25

The orange colour indicates for Italy a higher percentage than the average, green indicates a lower percentage. Source of international data: H. P. Peters et al. (2008), Science Communication: Interactions with the mass media, in Science, Vol. 321, No. 5886, pp. 204-205.

In the past three years have you had professional contacts with In the past three years have you had professional contacts with journalists? journalists?

by current career level and number of scientific articles publishedby current career level and number of scientific articles published

Summarizing researchers’ attitudes: A typologySummarizing researchers’ attitudes: A typology

  Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Type 5Contacts with the media − = + = −

Public communication of science activities

− = = + −

Attending training courses + − − + −Deficit model + = + − =Dialogue model + − = − =Participation model + + = = −

Judgment on the presentation of science in the media 

+ = + = +

Personal enjoyment of public communication

− + + = −

Social relevance of public communication

+ + + − =

The typology was constructed by carrying out a two-step cluster analysis after recoding the variables and constructing additive indices. The  variables  related  to  patterns  of  public  communication  of  science have been  summarized  in  an  index after  principal  component analysis.The symbol  -  indicates  that  the majority of  the researchers belonging  to  the group  indicated  the  lowest mode of  the variable (eg. no contact,  no  activity,  disagreement),  the  symbol  =  indicates  that  the majority  of  the  researchers  have  shown  the  average mode  (eg. occasional contacts, uncertainty), the symbol + indicates that the majority of researchers have marked the higher mode (eg. frequent contacts, more than five activities, agreement, positive judgement).

The distribution of types (%)The distribution of types (%)

To continue the discussion...To continue the discussion...

www.massimianobucchi.itwww.observa.it, www.scienceinsociety.eu