Tags
advantages, benefits, communicating research, communicating science, course, public engagement, public health research, public health science, research communication, science communication
Communicating science is so often focused on transferring knowledge from experts to members of the public. More and more often it is also associate with engaging and communicating with the public. But still with a focus on what the public or the common man gets out of this. But what’s in it for the scientist? How can science communication benefit the researcher personally? Is it just a waste of time and a burden?
These questions are key to module 3 of the course Public Health Science Communication. In preparing for the module, I was surprised of how difficult it was to find literature that focuses specifically on this topic. It is mentioned as a component of science communication but little research put it at the center – at least as far I have been able to find out…
For the course I have included four texts that all touches upon the topic, but doesn’t have it as the main focus:
- Interaction with the mass media - Peters HP, Brossard D, de Cheveigné S, Dunwoody S, Kallfass M, Miller S, Tsuchida S. Science 11 July 2008: Vol. 321 no. 5886 pp. 204-205
- Social media is more than simply a marketing tool for academic researchby Amanda Alampi. The Guardian, highereducation network. 24 July 2012
- The Verdict:Is blogging and tweeting about research papers worth it? by Melissa Terras. LSE blog: impact of social sciences. 19 April 2012
- Academic staff and public communication: a survey of popular science publishing across 13 countries – by Peter Bentley and Svein Kyvik. Public Understanding of Science, January 2011 vol. 20 no. 1 48-63
I have later on come across the two articles below, which focus on the costs and benefits of research communication. Both, however, put most attention on the costs and the potential benefits of alternative models for scholarly publishing (e.g. open access) and focuses on to a lesser extend on the benefits of the actual communication of science.
Research communication costs in Australia, Emerging opportunities and benefits
Costs and benefits of Research communication: The Dutch Situation (click here for the summary version)
What’s in it for you?
Therefore: In preparation for the course it would be great to receive some inputs from you people out there on how communicating your science has helped YOU. What have the benefits been for YOU? Do they out-weigh any potential disadvantages? If your research could talk – what would it say it got out of you communicating?
Hints to blog posts, book chapters, articles, podcast etc. focusing on this or just your own testimonials will be highly treasured! And will of course be fed back through this blog.
Reblogged this on and commented:
A repost from http://publichealth2point0.com about Communicating Science
Thanks for reblogging. Can’t seem to find your comment though
Hi there, not sure where the comment went – great post anyways! hope we’ll stay in touch?!
Sure we’ll stay in touch. Glad for you found the post useful
Got this great recommendation from Matt Shipman (@ShipLives) Why Scientists Should Publicize Their Findings-–for Purely Selfish Reasons: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/06/18/why-scientists-should-publicize-their-findings-for-purely-selfish-reasons/
Perhaps this may be of use
‘Public Engagement – Why bother?’ http://www.scoop.it/t/public-engagement-why-bother by Patrick Middleton (@Patrick_Midd) BBSRC Head of Engagement.
This is definitely an interesting and a much under explored topic in general. I find it interesting how the onus has been consistently placed on the scientists to engage in communication to non-academic publics, but the research focus has been largely been maintained on the publics.
I think that’s in large part why i decided to focus on the scientists’ experience in communication of scientific research for non-academic audiences as the general area of inquiry for my phd.
Question: Is research communication synonymous with scholarly communication?
Thanks for the link and the question. Is research communication synonymous with scholarly communication? I would not say synonymous but that scholarly communication is a category within science communication, which can take many forms. So definitely a very valid dimension of it!
Al though not being the most recent article, this article from 1997 “Incentives and impediments to scientists communicating through the media” http://esvc000173.wic058u.server-web.com/pdf/incentives_conf.pdf describes some of the perceived the benefits of communicating science seen from the scientists’ perspective
Pingback: Science communication – what’s in it for the scientist? what’s in it for science? | Social media & scientific research | Scoop.it
Pingback: Benefits of science communication – for the scientist – part II « Public Health Science Communication 2.0
Pingback: Signs Of Science - Blog on science, technology and communication