ASC2018 - 11-15 Nov, Sydney

by

New Role for Science in Science Communication – Lessons to learn from analyzing CCS media coverage in Germany

When: Tuesday 13th November, 4:00pm – 5:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T12

The analysis of the media coverage of CCS in daily newspapers from 2004 to 2014 of CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) provided new insight into the role of science and science public relations (PR) within the public debate. While CCS is linked to various industry sectors, such as cement and steel production, the German debate predominantly focused on the coal and energy branches. CCS, while it is an important issue within the context of climate-change mitigation options, has played a major role in the agendas of scientists, researchers, and engineers. Nevertheless, CCS media coverage in Germany was dominated by other stakeholder groups. The analysis showed, that science has lost its role as a proactive actor within science communication. It seems, that new approaches for future science PR has to be deduced to strengthen, once again, the role of science communication. Among these approaches, it is important to pursue a more differentiated understanding of target audiences and regional concerns. Science PR has to accept that science itself is no longer the only stakeholder and actor within science communication.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring new and social media

Presenter

Simon Schneider, Universität Potsdam, Institut für Erd- und Umweltwissenschaften

 

by

Forget Fake News – Is PR Hype the Big Problem in Science and Could a Media Release Labelling System Help?

When: Wednesday 14th November, 2:40pm – 3:40pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #W15

Science and health stories are often criticised for containing conflicting, exaggerated or misleading claims, and while journalists may play a role, a 2014 study showed that exaggeration in news is strongly associated with exaggeration in media releases.

In just the last 12 months there have been a myriad of media releases using the word ‘breakthrough’, or describing the outcome of mouse studies as if they had been done in humans. Is it media teams or scientists themselves who are spinning the research?

In the era of fake news, do those of us communicating science research need to lift our game? A voluntary labelling system for media releases may be part of the answer. Our colleagues at the Science Media Centre in the UK created a simple labelling system to help journalists get their heads around medical research media releases and what they really mean.

The system has already been adopted by several major journal publishers including Cell Press and the British Medical Journal (BMJ).

This session will discuss hype in science media releases, its impacts, origins and what can be done to address it.

Session Producer/Session Chair/Presenter

Lyndal Byford, Director of News and Partnerships, Australian Science Media Centre (AusSMC)

Presenters

Jason Whittaker, Story Editor, Media Watch, ABC TV

Kellia Chiu, PhD candidate, The University of Sydney

Dr Meredith Ross, Marketing & Communications Officer, Garvan Institute of Medical Research

 

by

Inquiring science minds want to know: A visual-material approach to understanding the applied practice of interactive science reporting and audience engagement

When: Tuesday 13th November, 4:00pm – 5:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T12

Abstract
This presentation looks beyond geospatial technology and considers a new, innovative approach to visual communication, interctive science reporting, and public engagement. Introduced is the concept of visual-material rhetorics as an effective mode of inquiry that situates story map journals (inclusive of geospatial narratives) as an emerging genres of interactive new media science reporting.

Introduction
New media platforms inclusive of interactive and geospatial technologies are emerging as multimodal artifacts in the field of science communication and journalism. With the addition of geospatially driven technologies in STEM industries, science communicators and journalists must look to innovative and multiple modes of inquiry that investigate how new media genre conventions in interactive science reporting engage public audiences. Amy Propen’s (2012) applied concept of visual-material rhetorics is introduced as an innovative method of inquiry in visual and science communication research. Her method of inquiry presents a new understanding of digital text and technology in relationship to space, place, and geospatial mapping and situates the spatial dimensions of scientific texts alonside multimodal components including interaction design and cartographic, geospatial technologies.

Methods/Approach
A genre analysis of existing interactive story maps journals used in STEM industries guided by visual-material rhetorics as an effective mode of inquiry. The study also recognizes how interactive story map journals could be theorized through the concept of visual-material rhetorics alongside traditional and contemporary understandings of new media genres and interaction design in science communication (Andersen, 2015; Caquard and Cartwright, 2014; iText working group, 2001; Propen, A., 2006, 2007, 2011; Villanueva, Dolum, and Belen, 2018).

Insights
This study identifies the effectiveness of visual-material rhetorics as an innovative mode of inquiry in the study of emerging new media, interaction design, visual communication, and multimodal environments used in science communication (Arola, Sheppard, and Ball, 2014; Fraiberg, 2018; Kelly, 2017; Miller and Kelly, 2017; Reid, G., 2017).

References
Andersen, J. (2015). Genre theory in information studies. Emerald Group Publishing.
Caquard, S., & Cartwright, W. (2014). Narrative cartography: From mapping stories to the narrative of maps and mapping. The Cartographic Journal: Cartography and Narratives – Special Issue (51)2, 101-106. https://doi.org/10.1179/0008704114Z.000000000130 Fraiberg, S. (2018). Multilingual and multimodal practices at a global startup: Toward a spatial approach to language and literacy in professional contexts. English for Specific Purposes, 51, 55-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2018.03.003
Hiippala, T., & Tseng, C. I. (2017). Media evolution and genre expectations. Discourse, Context, and Media. 20, 157-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.11.001
iText Working Group, Geisler, C., Bazerman, C., Doheny-Farina, S., Gurak, L., Haas, C., Johnson-Eilola, J., Kaufer, D.S., Lunsford, A., Miller, C.R. and Winsor, D Winsor, D. (2001). IText: Future directions for research on the relationship between information technology and writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 15(3), 269-308. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F105065190101500302
Miller, C. R., & Kelly, A. R. (Eds.). (2017). Emerging genres in new media environments. Springer International Publishing.
Propen, A. D. (2012). Locating visual-material rhetorics: the map, the mill, and the GPS. Parlor Press.
Propen, A. (2011). Cartographic representation and the construction of lived worlds: understanding cartographic practice as embodied knowledge. In M. Dodge, R. Kitchin, & C. Perkins (Eds.). Rethinking maps: new frontiers in cartographic theory. (pp. 131-148) Routledge.
Propen, A. D. (2006). Critical GPS: Toward a new politics of location. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 4(1), 131. Propen, A. (2007). Visual communication and the map: How maps as visual objects convey meaning in specific contexts. Technical Communication Quarterly, 16(2), 233-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572250709336561
Reid, G. (2017). Shifting Networks of Science: Citizen Science and Scientific Genre Change. In Scientific Communication (pp. 17-38). Routledge.
Villanueva, L. S., Dolom, M. A. C., & Belen, J. S. (2018). Genre analysis of the “about us” sections of Asian Association of Open Universities websites. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring new and social media

Presenter

Susan Rauch, Lecturer, professional writing (science and technology), Massey University, School of English and Media Studies

by

The Art and Science of Collaboration – Three Case Studies on Finding Innovative Partnerships for Science Communication

When: Tuesday 13th November, 9:15am – 11:15am
Where: Theatrette, Level 2 behind the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T3

You have a message and you know who you want to reach, but you have little to no budget or resources. Partnerships are often the best way to maximise your science communication efforts, but how do I make it happen?

From the world’s largest museum to the smallest of conservation non-profits, organizations big and small face this very same problem. Micaela Jemison will present three case studies from her time at the Smithsonian Institution and Bat Conservation International (USA) to shed light on the process of finding the right partners and the potential benefits and pitfalls of these collaborations.

The case studies span a range of corporate, government/non-profit and media partners, as well as individual collaborators you may not expect. The result is an annual North American bat conservation campaign reaching more than 24 million people, integration of conservation science messages into one of the world’s most popular online games for kids, and a virtual reality experience bringing a “Batnado” to the rest of the world.

Session

Case studies: Cultural Institutions and Festivals

Presenter

Micaela Jemison, Science Communicator, Smithsonian Institution

by

Comparing science communication models with a long-term participatory case study: The Climate Champion Program

When: Tuesday 13th November, 2:00pm – 3:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T8

Over the last 20 years, scholars and policymakers have called for science communication to move beyond linear engagement to participatory engagement, especially with publically contested science. However, there has been little scholarly reflection on long-term participatory science communication practice. My study compared the theorised science communication models with a seven-year case study: the Australian Climate Champion Program, where scientists and farmers jointly addressed the problem of climate risk. I investigated scientists and farmers’ objectives for participating, the nature of their interactions, and the relationships between them. I analysed how they valued different sources of knowledge and acknowledged risk. Respectful, open and trusting relationships developed between most of the farmers and scientists participating in the program resulting in upstream engagement and co-learning. This case study demonstrates that a long-term participatory program can enhance co-existing linear forms of communication (deficit and dialogue) to help achieve participatory outcomes.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring knowledge, beliefs and perceptions

Presenter

Jennifer Metcalfe, Director, Econnect Communication

 

by

I’ll see it when I believe it: motivated numeracy in Australians’ perceptions of climate change risk

When: Tuesday 13th November, 2:00pm – 3:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T8

People don’t form attitudes about Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC) risks just by empirically considering the likelihood of harm, the consequences of failing to act, and the costs and benefits of mitigation. If that was the case, there should be little disagreement about these quantifiable outputs of scientific research. However, when people consider controversial topics of decision-relevant science like ACC they often defer to their political beliefs, rather than using their cognitive abilities alone, leading to polarised groups. Counterintuitively, Kahan et al. (2017) found that more numerate people, who have the cognitive ability to interpret scientific data, were more polarised than others about the effectiveness of gun control laws on crime in the United States of America.

In our conceptual replication of this important study we investigated whether the motivated numeracy effect found in Kahan et al. (2017) also applies to people when assessing ACC risks. This randomised controlled experiment (N = 504) of Australian adults, extends the motivated reasoning thesis by finding evidence that some people who consider topics of ACC risk use motivated numeracy to rationalise their interpretations of scientific data in line with their beliefs.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring knowledge, beliefs and perceptions

Presenter

Matt Nurse, Masters degree candidate, CPAS, Australian National University

Co-Author
Will Grant

by

Mapping the science writing and communication landscape in Canada using new media and traditional survey research tools

When: Tuesday 13th November, 4:00pm – 5:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T12

The social media landscape presents new challenges for science communication that have not yet been fully understood. This Canadian government-funded project, conducted by researchers in partnership with ASC’s sister organizations in Canada (the Science Writers and Communicators of Canada, SWCC, and the Association des communicateurs scientifiques du Québec, ACS), aimed to identify who is currently communicating about science in Canada and how they are doing it. Using emerging new media research tools (Altmetrics and Netlytics) and commonly-used hashtags (i.e. #scicomm; #commsci, and #sciart) we identified 256 dedicated social media science communicators (197 Twitter and 59 Instagram) located in Canada. We surveyed these social media communicators about their communication practices and compared their survey responses to survey responses gathered from association members (254 SWCC members and 309 ACS members). Findings show that, compared to association members, the social media communicators we identified through new media mapping were younger (26-36 years of age), paid less (or not at all) for their science communication activities, and had been communicating science for fewer years (2-5 years compared to 10 years or more). More members of the social media group had a science background (rather than communication, journalism or education background). Fewer of the social media communicators were members of related professional associations, however, more were members of informal science writing/communication networks. The social media communicators used a greater diversity of media tools to communicate when compared to association members. We will discuss how the findings from this research project are being used to inform professional member association policies, training and outreach activities to improve the quality of public engagement with science in Canada.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring new and social media

Presenter

Dr Michelle Riedlinger, Associate Professor, University of Fraser Valley, Canada

Co-Author
Germana Barata
Alexandre Schiele

by

A sea of deficit: The science communication landscape in Australia

When: Tuesday 13th November, 2:00pm – 3:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T8

Science communication has been predicated on the deficit model —top-down, one-way communication from scientists to public audiences seen as “… empty vessels – as minds in deficit that need scientific information in order to be replete” [1]. This model has been discredited for 30 years, with research showing that more scientific information does not lead to the desired objectives of increased scientific literacy or public acceptance or agreement with science [2, 3]. And so a new mood for dialogue was identified in the U.K. House of Lords 2000 report [4], which consequently led to the UK’s Committee on the Public Understanding of Science (COPUS) closing itself down stating: “We have reached the conclusion that the top-down approach which COPUS currently exemplifies is no longer appropriate to the wider agenda that the science communication community is now addressing” [5].

Despite the above, our research suggests that the deficit model not only persists in Australia — it prevails. This study examines the science communication landscape in Australia, specifically during National Science Week in August 2018. Approximately 1300 activity organisers across Australia were asked to complete a short online activity profile survey. Based on the Generic Learning Outcomes (GLO) framework [6] and the CAISE Informal Science Education project framework [7], the survey contained questions about individual activity objectives, style and format. A total of 305 individual activity profiles were collected and categorised using the CAISE project framework.

The results show that across Australia, 71% of National Science Week activities classified as deficit model, while only 3% classified as dialogue or engagement model. This result is higher than the almost 60% of 411 activities categorised as deficit model in the Inspiring Australia audit in 2012 [8]. Based on the research discrediting this model, we argue that the prevalence of the deficit model in Australia may be impacting the effectiveness of science communication efforts in achieving desired objectives.

References
1. Gregory, J. and S. Miller, Science in public: Communication, culture and credibility. 1998, New York: Plenum.
2. Durant, J.R., G.A. Evans, and G.P. Thomas, The public understanding of science. Nature, 1989. 340(6228): p. 11-14.
3. Thomas, G. and J. Durant, Why should we promote the public understanding of science. Scientific literacy papers, 1987. 1: p. 1-14.
4. House of Lords, Science and Society. 2000, House of Lords: London.
5. Copus, Statement on Copus by the British Assiciation, the Royal Institution and the Royal Society. 2002, The Royal Society: London.
6. Hooper-Greenhill, E., et al., Measuring the Outcomes and Impact of Learning in Museums, archives and Libraries. 2003, University of Leicester: Research centre for Museum and Galleries.
7. McCallie, E., et al., Many Experts, Many Audiences: Public Engagement with Science and Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report. 2009, Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE): Washington, D.C.
8. Metcalfe, J., K. Alford, and J. Shore, National audit of Australian science engagement activities. 2012, Inspiring Australia: Canberra, Australia.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring knowledge, beliefs and perceptions

Presenter

Isabelle Kingsley, PhD candidate, Science Communication, University of New South Wales

Co-Author
Dr Carol Oliver, Senior Research Fellow, University of New South Wales

Australian Science Communicators

About ASC.

@auscicomm

ASC on Facebook

Questions? Please contact Kali on asc2018@asc.asn.au.

Acknowledgements

© 2018 Australian Science Communicators

Editor Login.

SPONSORED BY

SUPPORTED BY

TRADE EXHIBITORS