Filter by keyword: Public engagement with science and technology

A substantial body of empirical research identifies participatory models of science communication as best practice for achieving social, ethical, or governance objectives, particularly where dialogue, inclusion and public influence are central. At the same time, storytelling has emerged as a widely used strategy for engaging audiences with scientific issues, helping audiences make informed decisions, and shaping community attitudes and behaviours regarding science-related topics. Drawing on narrative studies, this essay examines how storytelling contributes to audience engagement through processes such as narrative transportation, simulation, and p-responses. It argues that reading or listening to stories is not a passive activity, and that these forms of audience engagement can be understood as interpretive and affective involvement. Storytelling does not always support participation in the dialogic or co-productive sense (typically associated with participatory science communication), but it can always support some of the aims of participatory approaches, such as fostering reflection, empathy, and relevance. While remaining analytically distinct from participatory practices that involve audience input and influence, it plays a valuable and complementary role in science communication by enhancing audience accessibility and resonance.

Correction of misinformation is a top priority for scientific organizations. Concern over misinformation is particularly prominent in social media, which is characterized by incivility. Because correcting misinformation online can expose scientists to uncivil responses or personal attacks, understanding barriers and motivations to correct misinformation among individual scientists is critical to identifying how institutions can best support scientists to maintain engagement in public communication of science. In this commentary, we review survey data of scientists at land-grant universities in the United States ($n = 413$) and find that a tendency to self-censor is not related to scientists' propensity to correct misinformation in social media. Deliberative aspirations, however — or the prospect of opening up peoples' minds to other perspectives — are related to behavioral intentions to correct misinformation for women scientists, in particular, as shown by a significant gender interaction effect. We conclude with specific recommendations that support motivations aligned with deliberative aspirations.

Scientists face growing pressure to share their research with the public — an ethical and professional duty that can sometimes lead to public hostility when addressing sensitive, controversial, or unpopular topics. Negative reactions from society, often worsened by social media, threaten not only the scientists themselves but also public trust in science and the integrity of knowledge systems. This commentary presents a case study of two scientists based in southern Africa, Professor Tulio de Oliveira and Professor Sikhulile Moyo, who identified the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) in November 2021. After sharing their findings with the relevant authorities, they encountered a wave of public criticism and abuse. Using insights from interviews with these scientists, we examine the different forms of this abuse, its impact, and the coping strategies they employed. We highlight the broader lessons this case offers for contemporary science communication, arguing that protecting scientists who face public backlash when sharing their research is essential for safeguarding science as a whole. We also suggest ways individuals, institutions, and the scientific community can create more supportive research environments for scientists working on potentially sensitive political or social issues.

Hostility towards science has emerged as a significant challenge in contemporary science communication, particularly in increasingly politicised and digitally mediated public environments. Scholars across diverse disciplines are confronted with harassment, delegitimisation, political interference, disinformation, and personal attacks, especially when engaging in public communication. This editorial introduces the JCOM commentary set “Scholars Under Attack” and situates hostility towards science within broader transformations of media ecosystems, political polarisation, and contested epistemic authority. The article argues that current debates remain conceptually fragmented and empirically underdeveloped, with limited comparative and longitudinal evidence regarding the scope, forms, and consequences of hostility directed at researchers. To address these gaps, the editorial proposes a working definition of hostility towards science as practices, discourses, and actions that undermine the authority, credibility, or integrity of scientific actors, knowledge, and institutions in politicised public arenas. The commentary set brings together interdisciplinary and international perspectives from Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Australia, highlighting how experiences of hostility vary across political systems, institutional contexts, disciplines, and social identities. The contributions examine online harassment, gendered hostility, misinformation, academic freedom, institutional shortcomings, and the paradoxical dynamics of visibility in digital communication. Collectively, they emphasise the need for more systematic empirical research, stronger institutional support structures, and nuanced conceptual approaches that distinguish hostility from legitimate critique while recognising the democratic importance of public science communication.

Hostile online communication is an increasing concern in academia. This commentary focuses on online harassment victims in Finland and online harassment perpetration in Europe. Data are drawn from representative surveys of Finnish academic research and teaching staff and national samples from Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and Poland. In Finland, 30% of academics reported online harassment within the past 6 months. Victims were disproportionately senior staff, minorities, and those in the social sciences and humanities. Only approximately 18% of the perpetrators were a member of the respondent's work community at their university. Public engagement in the media heightened risk. Victims reported more distress, lower trust, and weaker workplace support. Across Europe, men reported having sent offensive or threatening online messages more commonly. Perpetration was associated with younger age, psychological distress, and higher online involvement. These findings highlight the need to strengthen institutional support and improve digital culture to protect academic freedom and well-being.

This report presents an analysis of the communication efforts of the XXXII International Astronomical Union General Assembly, the first held on the African continent. For the first time in its history, the conference provided a fully streamed, open access experience on YouTube, complemented by a robust, multi-platform social media outreach campaign. Through metrics analysis and survey results, our study evaluates the effectiveness of diverse digital initiatives in enhancing engagement on different social media platforms to democratise scientific discourse. These findings offer critical insights for future hybrid and virtual conferences, providing social media metrics, best practices analysis and evaluation for social media scientific global communication of large-scale scientific gatherings.

This paper analyses the communication activities conducted within the framework of research projects funded under Horizon 2020, with more than €1M in funding, and led by Portuguese or Polish institutions. A total of 221 initiatives (68 Poland-led and 153 Portugal-led) are examined. The primary finding is that the majority of projects do not engage in communication activities. Web presence is observed in 41.1% of Poland-led projects and 41.8% of Portugal-led projects. In turn, social media presence is more common among Portugal-led (44.4%) than among Poland-led (29%) initiatives. Outreach activities are not very prominent, with a frequency of 28.1% and 23.5%, respectively. These figures improve slightly to moderately when controlling for projects' end date. Binary logistic regression analyses were conducted to test the influence of funding on communication activities. The relationship is positive across the board and reveals a potential effect, although it is statistically significant only for Portugal-led projects. These findings invite us to reconsider `legal obligation' to communicate the project and its outcomes that has become the norm in most grant funding, and provide a more nuanced understanding of the differences between `developed' and `developing' science communication landscapes.

Comunicar la ciencia en Iberoamérica: un sobrevuelo por la región is the first book-length, regionally authored history of science communication across twelve Ibero-American countries, published to mark the 35th anniversary of RedPOP. Written by practitioners and researchers from within the field, it traces how science communication has developed, and often survived, across vastly different political landscapes, from colonial-era natural history museums to today's social media ecosystems. Particularly striking is how several chapters frame science communication not just as public education but as a form of cultural resistance and democratic resilience. The book has geographical and thematic gaps, but it fills a long-overdue space in the literature and should be on every science communicator's shelf.

AI-based chatbots offer new opportunities for communicating science-based information, but often fall short of established standards. We conducted two pre-registered experiments examining user perceptions of an AI-based chatbot providing information on nanoparticles in sunscreen. Study one (N = 508) tested whether a disclaimer about the chatbot's uncertain training data affected perceived source trustworthiness and information credibility. The results showed no significant effect of the disclaimer; perceptions were primarily influenced by users' prior attitudes. Study two (N = 1059) tested the evaluation of information on nanoparticles in sunscreen in an experiment with a 2 (source: scientist vs. AI-based chatbot) ×2 (presentation: static vs. dynamic) between-subjects design. The study showed that the scientist was evaluated as more trustworthy and the provided information seen as more credible compared to the AI-based chatbot. The two studies highlight the relevance of perceived objectivity in science and health communication, whether executed by humans or machines.

This study investigates how specific narrative elements, termed narrative depth, influence perceived story quality, transportation, and topic interest in science communication. Using structural equation modelling and experimental group comparisons, we examined the relationships between vivid imagery, protagonist emotions and motivations, and narrative engagement. Results showed that while narrative depth did not significantly impact perceived story quality, transportation emerged as a key mediator between perceived quality and topic interest. Additionally, women and individuals with higher education reported greater transportation and topic interest. These findings provide important insights into factors that influence the potency of stories in the context of science communication.