Abstract
AbstractCoordinated attempts to promote systematic approaches to the design and evaluation of science communication efforts have generally lagged behind the proliferation and diversification of those efforts. To address this, we founded the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) Science of Science Communication Scientific Interest Group (SciOSciComm-SIG) and undertook a mixed-methods survey-based evaluation of the group one year after its founding. Respondents indicated ongoing interest and some participation in public-facing science communication while identifying specific barriers, and praised the role of the SIG in expanding access to information about evidence-based practices.
Publisher
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Reference23 articles.
1. Science communication training: what are we trying to teach?
2. Where We Go From Here: Health Misinformation on Social Media
3. Scientists’ Prioritization of Communication Objectives for Public Engagement
4. Public communication by research institutes compared across countries and sciences: Building capacity for engagement or competing for visibility?
5. Fornetti, A. , Mannino, I. , Davies, S. , Joubert, M. , Trench, B. , Bucchi, M. (2023). Science communication education and training: challenges and strategies for research and academic institutions [Concluding statement]. Public Communication of Science Network. https://www.pcst.network/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/PCST-Venice-Symposium-2023-Concluding-Statement.pdf.pdf