Tessa Roedema, Sem Barendse & Frank Kupper
Digitalisation and the rise of social media, fragmentation and commercialisation of science communication interfaces, the increasing sensational value of scientific information, politicisation of science in public debates and science scepticism have fundamentally changed the way in which practitioners experience and engage with their work. How can – and should – science communication practitioners respond to these challenges? We have seen in our research that practitioners’ worldview, values, perspective on science and assumptions on audience influence the way in which practitioners undertake science communication activities. This means that it is important for practitioners to rethink and reflect on the perspectives they take on science, their audience, and consequently the activities they undertake to bridge the gap between science and society. These insights have motivated the RETHINK project to facilitate a reflective practice for science communicators.
This report offers insights into the work and achieved results of RETHINK’s European Sounding Board (ESB henceforward). The ESB helped RETHINK with the project’s objective to shape new forms of science communication. This strategic hub worked towards an integrated vision of the new science communication, linking up the emerging learning communities (Rethinkerspaces) and its outcomes to policy alignments. The interdisciplinary Sounding Board, which consists of independent members with diverse backgrounds and areas of expertise, ensured a good connection with relevant developments, opportunities and needs in circles of key stakeholders such as scientists and science journalists. In this way, research results and guidelines were validated by key professionals and practitioners in the field. The report looks into the contribution of the ESB in 4 crucial project areas: research, resources, teaching/training and policy. The report provides a description of the activities of the ESB members in each of these fields.
This deliverable is designed to reflect upon the work carried out in the context of the Rethinkerspaces workshops. First, it describes the aims of the Rethinkerspaces as local hubs in the seven countries across Europe, the main features of the Rethinkerspaces and the methodology used. Second, an overview of activities is provided. Third, the main outcomes and points discussed per workshop and per Rethinkerspace country are described. Lastly, we provide a conclusion and the implications of the main lessons we take from our experiences with the Rethinkerspaces.
Peter Hyldgård, Frederik Langkjær
In this report the RETHINK project provides briefs with guidelines and recommendation on how to improve the practice of science communication for three main actor groups: policymakers (at the political level, and at research institutions, as well as research funders), scientists/academia (universities and research institutions), and practitioners (science communicators).
The recommendations focus on actions that can be taken by the different actors to support and build better science communication focusing on sensemaking practices in the digital environment. They are inline with the academic science communication literature where training, incentives, and infrastructure are the repeated suggestions for improving science communication in general.
Peter Hyldgård, Frederik Langkjær
The RETHINK framework aims to support the improvement of the quality of science communication by:
- Providing an overview of the science communication ecosystem
- Raising awareness of the challenges that this ecosystem poses, and
- Posing practice-oriented reflexive questions that can help address these challenges
The framework can be used by anybody involved in science communication and is based on the project’s research into the digital communication landscape, sensemaking practices, and quality. As mentioned, the framework is layered and intended to be interactive so that science communicators can click their way through it and seek the information that is relevant to them.
Birte Fähnrich, Laura Heintz
This report presents Deliverable 3.4 of the RETHINK project and relates to “Instruments for implementation and testing, including a train the trainer program, training resources applicable to different types of training”.
It outlines the underlying ideas of RETHINK that have led to the train the trainer program and related resources, summarizes the overall approach and describes the steps taken to develop a RETHINK SciComm Training Navigator. Moreover, the report contains a brief description of the Navigator’s content and structure and explains how to use it.
The final outcome of this deliverable is an accessible interactive pdf that helps trainers and students to reflect on the outcomes of the project and encourages them to experiment with new conditions for science communication. It can be accessed and dowloaded HERE.
“At least we’re trying”: Experimenting with roles and repertoires to foster new connections between science and society
Sem Barendse, Virgil Rerimassie, Tessa Roedema & Frank Kupper
The aim of this report is to explore the different roles science communicators assume – or should be assuming – to meet the challenges and demands in the contemporary science communication landscape. On the basis of earlier RETHINK research on how science communicators employ innovative techniques to reach underserved audiences, six roles were formulated that can be – and are – adopted by science communication practitioners to enhance their connections with a wider range of audiences: The Broker, creates connections between target audience and actors to obtain access to a target group, links with other actors to supply, involves all actors in dialogue; The Listener, connects to target audience with active listening and empathy and integrates that what is learned in communication activity; The Includer, breaks down physical, social, cultural barriers to give audience access to resources, spaces, knowledge & opportunities; The Enabler, provides target audience with access to information, resources, spaces, and changes power dynamics between science-society; The Educator, contributes to understanding scientific method and process, and critical thinking skills leading to misinformation identification; and The Entertainer, gets scientific communication across via games, arts, performances, hands-on activities & storytelling.
Tessa Roedema, Kelly Streekstra, Evi Berendrecht, Yvon de Vries, Eline Ramaaker, Kaisa Schoute, Virgil Rerimassie & Frank Kupper
Opening up sensemaking practices is a process of importance in the current complexity of the world. During this research a high variety of activities were initiated and analysed, and in this deliverable we made an early start of describing how these activities combine into the strategies that open up sensemaking practices. What’s more, the reflective practice and exploration of openness was evaluated as significantly valuable by the participating science communicators. Participants stated their efforts during this research had beneficial effects on their communication activities and in connecting with their audiences in a more profound way, and many shared that they would like to continue with experimenting with reflective practice. Therefore, in order to help out science communicators in these efforts, more tools and exemplary practices can be created, and are requested by the science communication community. This contribution is what the last phases of the RETHINK project will strive to work for.
Frederik Langkjær and Peter Hyldgård
The RETHINK project aims to enhance science communication so that it creates and supports open and productive interactions between science and society. This aim is motivated by two recent and interrelated developments that highlight the need for rethinking science communication, namely the blurring boundaries between science and society and digitalization.
In order to meet this need, it is crucial to understand more about the science communication ecosystem: Who communicates what to whom, how, why and on which conditions? How do people make sense of complex science-related problems? How are professional science communicators trained? And what is ‘good’ quality science communication in a digital media landscape? In order to address these questions, this report provides a cross-cutting analysis of the research done in RETHINK on these areas so far, with the aim of creating a solid foundation for future development of science communication fostering a more fruitful interaction between science and society in general.
Reaching Underserved Audiences:
How Science Communicators are Making New Connections Using Innovative Techniques
Elena Milani, Andy Ridgway, Clare Wilkinson, Emma Weitkamp
In this research, we interviewed science communicators about the strategies they use to reach, communicate and connect with underserved and disinterested audiences. The interviews we conducted provide an insight into the creativity that many science communication practitioners employ in their work when seeking to reach underserved or disinterested audiences. The successes they described may provide inspiration and encouragement to others in the field and a sense of optimism that meaningful connections can be created with diverse science publics. This is important in the field of science communication where there is still much to be done in relation to inclusivity.
Making sense of the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of the dynamics of citizen sensemaking practices across Europe
Virgil Rerimassie, Tessa Roedema, Lisa Augustijn, Amelie Schirmer & Frank Kupper
The aim of this report is to explore how European citizens make sense of the COVID-19 pandemic. In order to do so, we conducted 81 in-depth interviews with citizens, during the first wave of the pandemic. Participants came from eight European countries: Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal,
Serbia, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Following the Sensemaking Methodology (SMM) developed by Dervin (2008), during these interviews we explored how citizens made sense of so-called micromoments: specific moments in which they stumbled upon questions and uncertainties relating to the
Andy Ridgway, Elena Milani, Clare Wilkinson, Emma Weitkamp
Sensemaking is the process by which citizens develop an understanding of a complex reality. In this report, we attempt to consider the implications of the motivations and working practices of science communicators and the ways in which citizens make sense of science for the connections between science and society. This is achieved by exploring the barriers and opportunities to open and reflexive sensemaking practices. It is through open and reflexive sensemaking practices that closer, more effective interactions can take place between science and society, thereby facilitating RRI.
A Delphi study was conducted to examine experts’ opinions on questions of science communication quality online. Results of the first wave of the Delphi showed that experts hold very different perspectives on both actual quality criteria as well as the ways in which quality standards can be promoted and secured.. The second wave, however, revealed more commonalities and shared perspectives with regards to generalizable
quality standards and approaches to differentiate quality demands in different situational settings.
Elena Milani, Andy Ridgway, Clare Wilkinson, Emma Weitkamp
The audiences reached by those engaged in science communication and the nature of the connections with those audiences is of central importance to the science-society relationship. It determines who is reading, listening and watching information about science but also characterises those interactions. Do the interactions involve a one-directional ‘broadcast’ of information from communicator to audience, or is the relationship more of a two-way approach that fosters a more integrated relationship between science and society?
Report on the Working Practices, Motivations and
Challenges of those Engaged in Science Communication
Elena Milani, Andy Ridgway, Clare Wilkinson, Emma Weitkamp
The working practices of those engaged in the communication of science to non-expert audiences has important implications for the relationship between science and society. The research presented here explores these working practices and the motivations that underpin them across a wide range of science communicators in Europe. As such, it provides an insight into the nature of contemporary science communication and those who are involved with it. To find out about the working practices of science communicators, an online questionnaire was distributed in seven European countries; Italy, The Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Serbia, Sweden and the UK. The largest number of respondents were press officers, followed by freelance communicators/writers and journalists/editors. The survey also gathered responses from researchers, university lecturers and professors as well as some who communicate science predominantly online, such as bloggers, YouTubers and social media influencers.
Report on incentive and disincentive structures for R&I stakeholders to engage in science communication
Tessa Roedema; Virgil Rerimassie; Frank Kupper
The contemporary science communication ecosystem is complex: science and society meet each other at
multiple interfaces, communication takes place in multiple directions and moreover, the different actors may
have widely differing ideologies and assumptions. In addition, digitalization is intensifying the – already
complex – dynamics in this ecosystem fundamentally. At the same time, digitalization also offers novel
possibilities for scientists and scientific institutions to communicate and engage with the public and other
stakeholders, and henceforth contribute to a better science-society relationship. Against this backdrop, this
study aims to examine what motivates scientists to engage with the public through the internet and online
media, and what holds them back herein.
WP 3.1 provides an overview of academic science communication programs in four RETHINK partnering countries (UK, the Netherlands, Portugal, Italy) and Russia to analyze how available programs cope with the challenges of the “new” complex and digitalized communication environments. Based on a small sample study of 12 programs we show that science communication education is adapting promisingly to the new science communication landscape and related changes, and aims at teaching the students a profound understanding of the complexities of the new science communication dynamics. Programs largely implement content about digitalization and recent developments in their programs, although they rate their importance differently. However, related risks of science communication online are only taught to some extent, by encouraging students´ critical thinking about sources of information and interaction processes between communicators. We identified that most programs assess science communicator roles in line with co-creation and interaction with the public, but some programs also imply more traditional communicator roles of information disseminators. We can conclude that programs, overall, aim at providing their graduates with specific knowledge, competences and attitudes that will help them to serve as professional communicators in an increasingly complex science communication environment. However, further research is needed to assess how programs can ideally implement modules to convey the challenges of digitalization successfully to students.
Milani, Elena; Roedema, Tessa F. L.; Doedens, Mariël; Mazzonetto, Marzia; Sielicka-Baryłka, Klara; Lobo Antunes, Joana; Bohlin, Gustav; Bergman, Martin
The Scoping Report on the Science Communication Ecosystem represents an attempt to map the diversity of actors and the content they produce. The research conducted allows comparisons of the online science communication landscapes in different European countries (Italy, the Netherlands, the UK, Sweden, Poland, Serbia and Portugal) and has a broad focus; not only including the work of professional science communicators but also ‘alternative’ science communicators.