September 1, 2018 by asc2018

The value of social media for scientists: what do students think?

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

Twitter is widely considered a useful and effective communication tool among scientists. I explored the perceptions of 472 research-active science students regarding the potential role that social media in general, and specifically Twitter, could play in scientists’ professional lives.

I initially asked students (pre-survey) whether they currently used Twitter and asked for their responses to statements including: ‘Social media plays an important role in the professional life of a scientist’, ‘Social media is a valid way to communicate about science with other scientists’ and ‘Having a professional presence on social media can help my science career’. A month after a class focused on the value of Twitter and other social media to scientists, I asked students to respond to the same statements (post-survey) and also established how many of them had begun using Twitter.

All results were similar across all years (2014 – 2018). Initially, most students used social media personally, but not professionally, and less than a third were Twitter users. Most students perceived social media to be a valid way of communicating about science with lay audiences; few believed this to be true for communicating among scientists.

At the time of the post-survey, half the class used social media both professionally and personally and roughly 80% answered that they were Twitter users. The proportion of students who believed that social media was a valid way to communicate about science with scientific audiences had also increased. Students were also more inclined to agree with the statement that social media plays an important role in the professional life of a scientist.

A one-hour session outlining the value of Twitter to scientists was sufficient to encourage many students to start using Twitter and appeared to contribute to more students seeing a role for social media in the professional life of a scientist.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring new and social media

Presenter

Jen Martin, Educator and radio personality, The University of Melbourne

September 1, 2018 by asc2018

How should we communicate science on social media? A machine learning approach to science communication research.

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

There is concern that a crisis of trust may be looming between society and scientists, as evidenced by the display of considerable public distrust in important issues such as climate change and childhood vaccinations. This perceived erosion of public confidence in science is one of the impetuses behind the public engagement with science movement, whereby scientists are called upon to engage in dialogues with the public to help improve public trust in science and scientists. Thanks to their built-in architecture for participation, social media have been hailed as useful tools that scientists can use to engage directly with the public. Despite the growing interest in social media to communicate science, evidence for the effectiveness of social media in influencing public attitudes towards science is scant. This study addresses two overarching research questions: (1) does communicating with scientists on social media have any effects on public trust in science and scientists? and (2) what are the factors that affect audience engagement and trust in science?

More than 500,000 space science-related social media messages were collected. The main method used is machine learning, demonstrating the feasibility of automated methods in science communication research. Results indicate that communicating with space scientists on social media causes a boost in trust in science and scientists. Further, results also suggest that the factors associated with audience engagement (e.g., retweets, likes) and trust in science are very different: visual elements stimulate audience engagement, while similarity is the biggest determinant of trust. Authenticity is the only feature that impacts both engagement and trust. This suggests that science audiences like and trust messages that are personal, honest, and genuine. The world increasingly needs scientists to also be advocates of science. The findings of this study represent concrete evidence that could help guide social media science communication efforts.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring new and social media

Presenter

Yi-Ling Hwong, Post-doctoral research associate, Climate Change Research Centre, UNSW

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

September 1, 2018 by asc2018

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

Australian Science Communicators

Acknowledgements

SPONSORED BY

SUPPORTED BY

TRADE EXHIBITORS