Filter by keyword: Public engagement with science and technology

Browse all Publications

Date of publication Sep 29, 2015 Category: Commentary

Beyond the dissemination of Earth Observation research: stakeholders’ and users’ involvement in project co-design

by Alba L'Astorina , Irene Tomasoni , Anna Basoni , Paola Carrara

Modern technology and innovation research needs to analyse and collect users’ requirements from the outset of the project’s design, according to the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) approach. Bringing in new services without involving end-users in the whole research process does not make for optimal results in terms of scientific, technological and economic impact. This commentary reports on research experience of stakeholder involvement and co-production in Italy, implemented in Earth Observation downstream services at regional level. It reports the participative approach and method adopted and the impacts and benefits derived.

Volume 14Issue 032015
Date of publication Jul 24, 2015 Category: Essay

“Queue up, you stupid!”: communicating about technology problems. An exploratory study of warning messages posted on machines in public places

by Beatrice Arbulla , Massimiano Bucchi

Communication about technology has long been neglected within the field of science and technology communication. This visual exploratory study focuses on how users can communicate with and about technology in public places through warning signs posted on technological devices.
Three broad categories of messages have been identified: bad design, malfunctioning and disciplining users. By analyzing examples within each category, we suggest that studying these communicative situations can be a key to understanding how users are engaged in continuous, elaborate and sometimes even conflicting framing of technological devices (e.g. with regard to their purpose, appropriate uses, shifting boundaries between functioning/malfunctioning); how such framing, in turn, can be used to readjust/realign social behavior and organizational routines.

Volume 14Issue 032015
Date of publication May 26, 2015 Category: Article

Does attending a large science event enthuse young people about science careers?

by Sam Illingworth , Emma Lewis , Carl Percival

A survey was conducted during the University of Manchester’s 2014 ‘Science Extravaganza’, which saw the participation of over 900 Key Stage 3 (ages 11–14) students in a range of interactive demonstrations, all run by active University researchers. The findings of this study suggest that a new approach is necessary in order to use these large science events to actively engage with school students about the career opportunities afforded by science subjects. Recommendations for such an approach are suggested, including the better briefing of researchers, and the invitation of scientists from outside academia to attend and interact with the school students.

Volume 14Issue 022015
Date of publication Apr 28, 2015 Category: Article

Highlighting the value of evidence-based evaluation: pushing back on demands for ‘impact’

by Heather King , Kate Steiner , Marie Hobson , Amelia Robinson , Hannah Clipson

This paper discusses the value and place of evaluation amidst increasing demands for impact. We note that most informal learning institutions do not have the funds, staff or expertise to conduct impact assessments requiring, as they do, the implementation of rigorous research methodologies. However, many museums and science centres do have the experience and capacity to design and conduct site-specific evaluation protocols that result in valuable and useful insights to inform ongoing and future practice. To illustrate our argument, we discuss the evaluation findings from a museum-led teacher professional development programme, Talk Science.

Volume 14Issue 022015
Date of publication Sep 22, 2014 Category: Article

Science blogging: an exploratory study of motives, styles, and audience reactions

by Merja Mahrt , Cornelius Puschmann

This paper presents results from three studies on science blogging, the use of blogs for science communication. A survey addresses the views and motives of science bloggers, a first content analysis examines material published in science blogging platforms, while a second content analysis looks at reader responses to controversial issues covered in science blogs. Bloggers determine to a considerable degree which communicative function their blog can realize and how accessible it will be to non-experts Frequently readers are interested in adding their views to a post, a form of involvement which is in turn welcomed by the majority of bloggers.

Volume 13Issue 032014
Date of publication Mar 13, 2014 Category: Editorial

Do we know the value of what we are doing?

by Brian Trench

The demand for evaluation of science communication practices and the number and variety of such evaluations are all growing. But it is not clear what evaluation tells us - or even what it can tell us about the overall impacts of the now-global spread of science communication initiatives. On the other hand, well-designed evaluation of particular activities can support innovative and improved practices.

Volume 13Issue 012014
Date of publication Mar 13, 2014 Category: Commentary

The right weight: good practice in evaluating science communication

by Giuseppe Pellegrini

Evaluations of science communication activities before, during and after their implementation can provide findings that are useful in planning further activities. As some selected examples show, designing such evaluation is complex: they may involve assessment at various points, a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods, and show that impacts differ when seen from different perspectives.

Volume 13Issue 012014
Date of publication Mar 13, 2014 Category: Commentary

Impacts of science communication on publics, cities and actors

by Gema Revuelta

An evaluation toolkit developed as part of the EU-funded PLACES project was applied in 26 case studies across Europe. Results show, among other things, the contribution of science communication initiatives to public curiosity, professional networking and perception of cities where these initiatives are stronger.

Volume 13Issue 012014
Date of publication Mar 13, 2014 Category: Commentary

The problems with science communication evaluation

by Eric A. Jensen

Even in the best-resourced science communication institutions, poor quality evaluation methods are routinely employed. This leads to questionable data, specious conclusions and stunted growth in the quality and effectiveness of science communication practice. Good impact evaluation requires upstream planning, clear objectives from practitioners, relevant research skills and a commitment to improving practice based on evaluation evidence.

Volume 13Issue 012014
Date of publication Nov 05, 2013 Category: Article

Combining citizen science and public engagement: the Open AirLaboratories Programme

by Hauke Riesch , Clive Potter , Linda Davies

Citizen Science (or “Public Participation in Scientific Research”), has attracted attention as a new way of engaging the public with science through recruiting them to participate in scientific research. It is often seen as a win-win solution to promoting public engagement to scientists as well as empowering the public and in the process enhancing science literacy. This paper presents a qualitative study of interviews with scientists and communicators who participated in the “OPAL” project, identifying three potential flashpoints where conflicts can (though not necessarily do) arise for those working on citizen science professionally. We find that although participation in the CS project was generally valued, it does not seem to overcome continuing (and widely reported) concerns about public engagement. We suggest that enthusiasm for win-win situations should be replaced with more realistic expectations about what scientists can expect to get out of CS-style public engagement.

Volume 12Issue 32013

Total: 342 records

Filter by keyword: Public engagement with science and technology

Search results