Filter by keyword: Public engagement with science and technology

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.

News media play a crucial role in communicating agricultural biotechnology tools such as genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and gene-edited crops to consumers, heavily influencing public perception of these technologies. This study assessed news media framing of gene editing in news reports in Ghana between 2021 and 2024. Underpinned by Media Framing Theory, we purposively selected and examined 56 reports from six online news platforms: three private and most read news portals and all three state-owned news media platforms. We found that while news reports were overwhelmingly pro-innovation centred—framing gene editing as a highly efficient scientific solution to agricultural challenges, consumer opinions and opposing viewpoints were notably absent. Academics, scientists and government officials advocating the technology were the more frequently quoted sources. We caution that the news media’s overreliance on elite sources for information, while excluding grassroot, critical and alternative perspectives, could trigger perceptions of elite manipulative intent (PEMI). This could potentially reinforce dominant narratives and may heighten public scepticism of the technology. We recommend increased attention and investment in science journalism, expanded resources for in-depth reporting, and redesigned training programs to equip journalists with both technical knowledge and critical skills. Notably, the majority of reports quoted local experts. This approach reinforces credibility of news coverage and is essential for building public confidence and trust in emerging technologies.

Science Communication for Scientists: Linking Strategy with Creativity, Practice, and Respect serves as a necessary, current resource for scientists seeking to communicate about their work more effectively. The book expertly meets the collective moment in which we find ourselves — socio-politically, based on practical norms and common institutional infrastructures and incentives, and based on the state of the science communication literature — to offer scientists operating in democratic societies a much-needed resource for communicating their science with various stakeholder groups.

This article reflects on #OneDOST4U, a unifying communication handle adopted by the Republic of the Philippines’ Department of Science and Technology (DOST) across multiple media vehicles. The campaign sought to strengthen a single institutional identity while inviting participation and feedback from diverse audiences, such as researchers, educators, local governments, industry partners, and communities. Through focus group discussions with stakeholders from 11 agency projects, we explored how publics interpreted and engaged with the campaign. Using qualitative thematic analysis, we identified recurring themes of value-in-use, dialogic engagement, and communal identity. Findings illustrate how institutional branding tools operate as boundary objects: recognisable symbols that different groups interpret in context while contributing to a shared sense of meaning. For science communication practice, #OneDOST4Udemonstrates that unifying institutional campaigns are most effective when treated as participatory boundary objects—tools that allow diverse stakeholders to negotiate meaning, build trust, and co-create the public value of science.

Public attitudes toward genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Kenya remain mixed due to limited knowledge, policy gaps, and cultural factors. Despite the 2020 commercialisation of Bt cotton, perceptions of GM technologies are largely unfavourable. This study surveyed 416 respondents across 14 counties to assess awareness and knowledge levels of GMOs. Results showed 49% support GMOs, 27% are uncertain, and 24% oppose them. Misconceptions persist, with 49.3% citing size and 22.4% recognising labelling as a means of identifying GMOs. Awareness of GMO commercialisation was low (24%), though nearly half correctly identified Bt cotton as an approved GMO, and 32.7% unaware of any institution carrying out GM research. Education significantly influenced acceptance ($\chi^2$ = 68.322, p 0.001). Radio was the most trusted information source (29.3%), and scientists were the most credible (46.4%). The findings underscore the need for targeted public communication strategies to address misinformation and enhance understanding of biosafety and biotechnology in Kenya.

Facts may have been declared dead, yet many science communicators continue to fight to keep them alive. At the same time, it is increasingly clear that preserving facts alone is not enough. To secure a meaningful place for science in today's world, science communicators must also develop new strategies that go beyond defending facts to fostering trust and engagement. They must fully embrace the `post-post truth' condition, in which the blurring of fact and opinion has become deeply entrenched in public discourse; and where many no longer know – or care — what constitutes truth. This can be achieved by rethinking science communication as performance beyond content delivery. This means creating aesthetic, existential, sensorial, and other experiences that make engagement with science more about relationships and identity, and less about establishing a common ground of truth. We illustrate what this approach looks like through the Theatre Dialogues of Dissent — a Dutch science communication project on the polarisation surrounding climate change.

There is widespread concern that the scientific enterprise is under attack, fuelled by misinformation campaigns, anti-intellectual political leaders, and growing public skepticism. In response, many scientists are mobilising to “stand up for science,” hoping to persuade publics of the many public health, technological, and economic benefits brought by scientific discoveries. In this commentary, we argue that such persuasion-based science communication approaches are neither effective nor appropriate because they neglect the role that values play in people's perceptions of and experiences with science. We propose shifting our focus to scientific empowerment, which we define as the ability and agency to inform and influence one's life through skills, knowledge, opportunities, experiences, and resources related to science. We argue that scientific empowerment can provide a practical means of acting upon one's values, foregrounding people's questions and concerns about science, rather than focusing on a battle about whose facts can be believed.