Search

Jul 13, 2026 Article

Transforming narratives: gender equity struggles in Latin American and Caribbean science museums

by Bianca Hipólito de Oliveira BHO , Alessandra Bizerra , Miss Mirelly de Oliveira Soares

Science museums are undergoing a transition, expanding their role in science communication to engage with equity and inclusion actively. Although women and gender-diverse individuals constitute a significant proportion of museum audiences, they remain underrepresented in exhibitions and leadership roles. This study examines how science museums can address gender equity. Based on a survey of science museum professionals across Latin America and the Caribbean, we identified respondents reporting gender-focused transformative actions. We conducted a thematic analysis of gender-focused transformative actions. Five key elements were developed: female participation, identity negotiation, disruption of normative gender narratives, historical recovery, and activism. The initiatives demonstrate significant transformative potential but are constrained by persistent challenges. By examining these evolving practices in contexts shaped by both structural inequalities and historical struggles for rights, this study contributes to an understanding of how science museums can act as spaces for social transformation.

Volume 25Issue 52026Transitions in Science Communication: Continuity and Change (PCST 2025)

Jul 13, 2026 Review Article

Organising collaboration for strategic science communication in research projects

by Marjo Pauliina Honkaranta , Tomi Laapotti , Tanja Sihvonen

This state-of-the-art literature review advances the shift in science communication research towards an organisational perspective, moving focus from individual researchers' capabilities to the role of organisational structures and practices. It explores how temporary collaborative research organisations, such as research projects, organise their activities, and examines the link between organisational structuring and science communication. Offering a structured overview, the review identifies research gaps and contributes to systematising the field by proposing a conceptual framework that integrates the communicative constitution of organisations (CCO) theory with institutional approaches to science communication. The literature reveals three key organisational dimensions: contextual conditions, cooperation, and communication. In addition to previously recognised components of `organisationality' — actorhood, identity, and interconnected decision-making — contextual conditions are also shown to play a role in organising in temporary research organisations. The theoretically driven framework supports the defragmentation of the research field and provides a foundation for future inquiry.

Volume 25Issue 52026Transitions in Science Communication: Continuity and Change (PCST 2025)

Jul 13, 2026 Practice Insight

Agents of (comedic) change: co-creation through improv to develop environmental science agency

by Claire A. Murray Dr , Ms Paola Serrano Bravo , Gesche Kindermann Dr , Jessamyn A. Fairfield

The climate crisis is no longer a crisis of knowledge, but a crisis of agency. Individuals wishing to act must overcome climate anxiety, feelings of powerlessness, and doubt associated with the complexity of the scientific realities of climate change. Rural communities offer much to learn about sustainable living and environmental solutions, but are rarely the site of many science communication initiatives due to inequities in funding, transit, and access to decision-makers. This practice insight explores how the act of performing in `We Built This City on Rock and Coal', an improvised theatre show about climate change in rural and remote communities in Ireland, supported performers to develop agency and transition towards taking pro-environmental actions in their own lives. Accessing environmental science expertise alongside space for emotional responses (both heavy and light-hearted) in specific contexts anchored by local knowledge helped practitioners create a platform for change and climate action.

Volume 25Issue 52026Transitions in Science Communication: Continuity and Change (PCST 2025)

Jul 13, 2026 Editorial

Transitions in science communication: agendas, approaches, and voices

by Declan Fahy , Alice Fleerackers , Ana Claudia Nepote , Guoyan Wang

This editorial introduces the JCOM special issue on “Transitions in Science Communication: Continuity and Change”. The issue positions continuity and change within four historical processes that have shaped the development of the field: institutionalisation, professionalisation, internationalisation, and diversification. Within these broad field-shaping processes, the issue seeks to capture moments of transition in science communication by featuring selected contributions to the 2025 conference of the Global Network for the Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST). The special issue combines three genres of contributions: research articles, practice insights, and an invited essay. Across these different contributions, the issue captures three types of transitions, focussed on agendas, approaches, and voices. It illustrates ongoing transitions within the institutions of science communication and transitions in professional roles and institutional responsibilities. It features contributions that show how the processes of internationalisation and diversification lead to new agendas, new approaches, and, crucially, new voices that can take science communication in new directions.

Volume 25Issue 52026Transitions in Science Communication: Continuity and Change (PCST 2025)

Jul 13, 2026 Article

Shared gatekeeping: comparing relevance criteria for selecting science information

by Janise Brück

Science communication experiences major transitions: alongside science journalists, scientists, their institutions, and public relations departments increasingly select and communicate science information to publics, thereby stepping into gatekeeping roles. To better understand this “shared gatekeeping” and how different science communicators select topics, this article investigates relevance criteria that guide selection and communication decisions of science information. Drawing on 57 interviews with German-speaking science journalists, science public relations practitioners, and scientists, the study identifies and compares relevance criteria for each group based on the hierarchy of influences model. Findings reveal a wide range of relevance criteria as well as similarities and differences at individual, communication routines, organizational, and social institutional levels. Although all groups seem to be guided by similar, partly journalistic, relevance criteria (e.g., overlapping goals, topic characteristics), they operate within distinct professional contexts and thus weigh these criteria differently.

Volume 25Issue 52026Transitions in Science Communication: Continuity and Change (PCST 2025)

Jul 08, 2026 Commentary

Beyond incivility: supporting scientists' efforts to correct misinformation online

by Ashley A. Anderson , Nicole Kelp , Sera Choi

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.

Volume 25Issue 42026

Jul 08, 2026 Commentary

Patterns of attacks against scholars in Germany: controversial topics as contexts and accelerators of science hostility

by Clemens Dietrich Blümel , Ennio Noél Brandt

In this commentary, we examine patterns of attacks against scholars focusing on the case of Germany. Drawing on the responses to open and closed questions in a recent survey of 2,600 German researchers, we identify context- and field-specific patterns of science hostility. While most responding researchers do not experience severe attacks, those engaged in specific fields may be at a higher risk of being threatened. We argue that attacks on researchers may not be perceived as acts of hostility against scientific institutions but rather emerge in the context of controversial topics. By drawing from material of open-ended questions, we provide context of such controversial topics in Germany. Our results suggest that these topics are disputed not only in public forums, but also in academic contexts — and not always appropriately. Such controversies both affect and transcend higher education institutions, as attacks can also originate from researchers themselves. Furthermore, our material suggests that scholars are concerned about how expertise is, or should be, represented in these contexts, and about how deliberation on these topics on campus can be upheld.

Volume 25Issue 42026

Jul 08, 2026 Commentary

From visibility to vulnerability: how women scientists face gendered hostility in science communication

by Dr Maider Eizmendi Iraola , Mr Simón Peña-Fernandez

Public communication of science has become a central component in the relationship between science and society. However, the media exposure of research staff has given rise to new forms of hostility, especially in digital environments. The study Experiences of researchers who interact with the media and social networks in Spain ScienceMediaCentreEspana2024 investigates — via a survey (N=237) — the incidence and typology of these attacks in the Spanish context. More than half of the research staff (51.05%) reported experiencing negative incidents, with a higher prevalence among women (56.9%) than men (46.2%). The attacks differ by gender: women face more challenges regarding their scientific capacity and sexist remarks, whereas men are more frequently targeted over their professional integrity. These dynamics reveal structural gender biases that affect the wellbeing and legitimacy of female scientists, emphasising the need for institutional policies with a gender perspective.

Volume 25Issue 42026

Jul 08, 2026 Commentary

Beyond expectation: institutional and structural shortfalls in supporting scholars engaged in science communication

by Josephine B. Schmitt , Sabine Reich

The commentary diagnoses a structural contradiction: policy, institutions, and funders often encourage outward-facing activity while outsourcing its risks to individual scholars or external institutions. Integrating interviews with climate change researchers (N=13) as a case study alongside selected scholarship (without claiming completeness), we document how institutional reputation can overshadow researcher-centered support, how training often underaddresses emotional and security burdens, and how assistance can wane when harassment escalates. While various studies — including our own — still point to inadequate support structures, there is a wide range of services on offer that could prove effective in the long term. We elaborate on some of these in more detail, with a particular focus on Germany as the authors' (academic) home country.

Volume 25Issue 42026

Jul 08, 2026 Commentary

Scientists under fire: lessons from the Omicron case

by Mrs Kim Darley Waddilove , Nothando Ngwenya , Marina Joubert

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.

Volume 25Issue 42026

Search results