What institutional barriers are keeping life scientists from communicating to the public about their work? #NASinterface

What institutional barriers are keeping life scientists from communicating to the public about their work? #NASinterface

What institutional barriers are keeping life scientists from communicating to the public about their work? #NASinterface

Sustainable Infrastructures for Life Science Communication: A Workshop. The National Academies invites you to join leaders from the life sciences community and from research organizations to explore the current landscape of public communication of the life sciences.

  1. next week at @NASciences, we’ll tackle friction and momentum to #scicomm. Join us in person or online! #NASinterface  http://bit.ly/1276S1N 
  2. DC weather got you down, you still want to watch @NASciences #scicomm workshop tomorrow? watch online! #NASinterface  http://bit.ly/1276S1N 
  3. @jackcschultz #NASinterface  http://bit.ly/1276S1N  looking forward to seeing you soon. hope you got some rest btwn our great meetings!
  4. TODAY’s forecast: @NASciences workshop, Sustainable Infrastructures for Life Science Communication. #NASinterface  http://nas-sites.org/publicinterfaces/ 
  5. DELAY: @NASciences Sustainable Infrastructure for Life #scicomm workshop will begin at 9AM TODAY. Roads are icy. Travel safe. #NASinterface
  6. At the NAS today for #NASinterface talking about sustainable infrastructures for life science communication
  7. #nasinterface #scicomm the Valley of Death or infrastructure, @brookesimler talks about the gap between scince and the public
  8. Is public engagement the “valley of death” of science? How to facilitate it? That’s topic today @ #NASInterface mtg!  http://ow.ly/rApbj 
  9. #nasinterface Brooke Smith @COMPASSonline sets the stage: what supports scientists’ communication and what are challenges #scicomm
  10. Kicking off #NASinterface meeting on how to develop and sustain infrastructures for #scicomm. Attendance hit by weather May Berenbaum webbed
  11. Sustainable communication infrastructure is the long-term structures, policies & cultures that allow communication to occur. #NASinterface
  12. Great that #scicomm is webcast. Missed some mid-transit due to weather, will some be archived?#NASinterface @NASciences @drkeegansawyer
  13. After students organized outreach, the university funded it. @MayBerenbaum‘s notes about #scicomm #NASinterface
  14. #NASinterface #scicomm May Berenbaum at workshop pointing out how useful #insects are for communicating science. We entomologists all know!
  15. Looks for discussion today with @NASciences at #NASInterface, about how to make all the things that make #scicomm happen, more sustainable.
  16. Entomophobes to entomophiles #NASinterface @MayBerenbaum great presentation on why insects deserve our respect and admiration. And loathing?
  17. does broader impacts now encourage engagement? @MayBerenbaum says “in theory”, #scicomm #nasinterface
  18. Missing @MayBerenbaum in person #nasinterface, but good hearing how she got involved with public outreach and insect film festival #scicomm
  19. Recognizing public engagement in faculty promotion policies is necessary. U’s need to lead the way #scicomm #NASinterface
  20. #NASinterface May Berenbaum complains re criticism by NSF reviewers’ of her BI plan in recent proposal. We need more of that. #GradSciComm
  21. Many science engagement & #citizensci projects are run on “altruism” (e.g.  http://beespotter.mste.illinois.edu ) How to make sustainable? #nasinterface
  22. Here’s a strategy for boosting @MayBerenbaum‘s NSF broader impact score & building #NASInterface infrastructure  http://bit.ly/1bsHOBE 
  23. “altruism is not a sustainable model” @MayBerenbaum on how to keep #scicomm going at #NASinterface
  24. .@MayBerenbaum mentions that UIUC promotion reqs include public engagement. Potential model for other unis? #NASinterface #scicomm
  25. it’s still challenging, but support for #scicomm has come a long way, @MayBerenbaum observes, #NASInterface
  26. .@MayBerenbaum shares her experiences using fear festivals, citizen science, social media, teaching, and more! #scicomm #NASinterface
  27. science communication can be motivated by self interest, and that’s okay, says @Duncande at #NASinterface
  28. Why should scientists get involved in #scicomm? “Naked self-interest” Funny but very true! #nasinterface
  29. Love Treetop Barbie mentioned by Nadkarni & talking about being a “brown girl” in science! #nasinterface  http://bit.ly/1kss0DH 
  30. Start where your audience is, @nalininadkarni makes “treetop Barbie” to motivate girls to be interested in forest ecology #NASinterface
  31. “You don’t need sharp tools to grow mosses.” Nadkarni about doing science in prisons. #nasinterface  http://bit.ly/1kss0DH 
  32. @nalininadkarni anecdotes about why she does public outreach have a lot of social activism elements #nasinterface #scicomm
  33. do you have to be a senior scientist to do science outreach? @nalininadkarni indicates she may have needed to be? #nasinterface
  34. “As a yng scientist, spent most time establishing my science. As sr scientist, can use my academic cache to expand #scicomm.” #NASinterface
  35. Becoming friends with media good thing for scientists; not one-way street: Wise words from @nalininadkarni #nasinterface
  36. Nalini Nadkarni talked abt motivations to do #scicomm @ diff stages of a scientists’ career #NASinterface
  37. Nadkarni says @brookesimler “valley of death” could be “mountaintop to understand life” with 2-way #scicomm everyone gains. #NASinterface
  38. Recommend all #scicomm interested folks follow #NASinterface today! Expect great stories and data. #sciox
  39. Need right examples, put in cultural context, to communicate science: Spot-on advice from Colón Ramos #nasinterface
  40. .@CienciaPR connect scientists w the public & facilitates #scicomm and outreach initiatives #NASinterface
  41. Over 390 articles + >200 podcasts authored by scientists have been published by @CienciaPR #NASinterface
  42. #NASinterface Question: Have any of you ever gotten into trouble for what you’re doing? #scicomm
  43. @DrCraigMc‘s term “Nerd of Trust” relevant given Susan Fiske’s research showing scientists may be respected but not trusted. #nasinterface
  44. barriers from @dacolon for #scicomm include trouble developing communication skills. #NASinterface
  45. #nasinterface @dacolon: “By communicating my science, tax payers are getting a bigger bang for their buck.” #scicomm
  46. While hired as a basic researcher, @dacolon assumes that if he communicates, he will be more valuable. possible bc at yale? #NASInterface
  47. GSA is participating in a @NASciences workshop on communications in the life sciences #nasinterface
  48. @dacolon “what we are looking at in <public outreach> is a shadow of what is could be because of lack of incentives” #nasinterface #scicomm
  49. Scientists are innate communicators. Question is who they are communicating to. We can expand skills we already have @dacolon #NASinterface
  50. YES!!! #nasinterface “If I pick up windsurfing, skydiving or science communication, it’s the same for me.” #scicomm
  51. MT @Sefini: “Scientists are innate communicators”. This is NOT my experience and not supported by data. @dacolon #NASinterface
  52. .@dacolon: Science communication helps public but also helps retain junior scientists, especially minorities. #nasinterface
  53. While he hadn’t gotten in trouble for doing #scicomm, @dacolon notes he has been told “as long as you’re doing your job” #NASinterface
  54. #nasinterface @dacolon: We have evidence that this helps retain junior scientists, especially minorities. #scicomm
  55. CAISE Advisor @nalininadkarni speaking now on both values & “dangers” of spending lots of time on public engagement #NASinterface
  56. #nasinterface Scientists are being told to focus on broader impacts. Those who discourage #scicomm are sending competing messages.
  57. scientists getting mixed messages – do your research AND pay attn to broader impacts, from @nalininadkarni – makes it hard. #NASinterface
  58. Do it because it’s important to me, my field, and scientific enterprise: @nalininadkarni on value of science communication. #nasinterface
  59. Looking forward to reading tweets from #NASInterface. So sad to be missing it! #scicomm
  60. #NASinterface Scientist-communicators here are very successful, excellent communicators. Did that help avoid barriers, or were they lucky?
  61. Are there barriers to scientists engaging in science communications? #scicomm #nasinterface
  62. #scicomm “heroes” don’t face stiff resistance. But what about scientists who aren’t as motivated? How do we get them involved? #nasinterface
  63. Is there a most important audience you target for #scicomm? @DrCraigMc just communicates and let the audience come. Hmmm…#NASinterface
  64. @jackcschultz Others visit schools, give talks, interviews, or just make their profiles open to public (diverse faces) #NASinterface (2/2)
  65. @Sefini BTW what I’ll say here at #NASinterface will be very similar to what I said at #GradSciComm.
  66. @brookesimler I should be clearer that our target is adults who are interested in the ocean #nasinterface
  67. @brookesimler very hard to be more specific with that online because audiences can shift quickly #nasinterface
  68. .@dacolon: In #scicomm, you may be able to use same content for general public & K-12. #NASinterface All about relevance to key audiences.
  69. #NASinterface Question: are you finding it useful or essential to go around press, direct to public audiences?
  70. .@dacolon most terrifying talk was at #AAASmeeting when bombarded by q’s from kids. #nasinterface
  71. .#nasinterface @dacolon: Most terrifying speech I’ve ever given was at #AAASmeeting family day mostly kids 7-12 years old.
  72. .@dacolon: “What is the value of my research in the broader context?” A question to ask when embarking on a #scicomm project. #NASinterface
  73. I wonder if when scientists describe their audience as the “general public” they mean “science-interested, engaged adults” #nasinterface
  74. .@dacolon -Talking to public (esp. 8 yr old kids) keeps you honest! Makes you focus on big picture. Always good for research #NASinterface
  75. On being useful/essential to go around press, @nalininadkarni says the passion sometimes need to go deeper for the audiencd. #NASinterface
  76. Making science relevant to the experiences of your audience is one of the most powerful communication tools for scientists. #NASinterface
  77. #nasinterface @dacolon: If your science is controversial, that’s not good. But, successful #scicomm is an explosion. Difficult to balance.
  78. Helpful to connect scientists to reach out to groups they can connect with @nalininadkarni #NASinterface
  79. “The more precise you get, the less relevant you get” @dacolon. Key struggle for science communicators. #NASinterface
  80. Nadkarni says Matching scientists to audiences with which they empathize is 1 approach to scientists doing #scicomm #nasinterface
  81. Q at #NASinterface: What if you had institution-wide support for doing broader impacts/#scicomm? Key individuals to coordinate that work?
  82. @ErikaShugart @BenLillie My guess is they don’t INTEND that to be target, but that is what they generally get. #nasinterface
  83. “STEMed centers @university‘s help aggregate & increase impact of #sciox” Would add prof.societies & orgs like @CienciaPR #NASinterface
  84. great idea @ivan_amato: feature scientists’ #scicomm stories in high profile places: shows what it takes and what you get #NASinterface
  85. Why not connect the best scientists with the best in science communication? @dacolon #NASinterface
  86. @dacolon challenges us to think about ways to use social media to connect scientists with experts in science communication #nasinterface
  87. .@dacolon: in research, you don’t become an expert in every subject–you partner w/ experts. Can we do that in #scicomm? #NASinterface
  88. music to your ears, @scheufele? @dacolon asks can we pair basic researchers with people that study science communications? #NASinterface
  89. At National Academies for #NASinterface to discuss how to create sustainable infrastructures for scicomm.
  90. .@CienciaPR has created links btw scientists & sci communicators to help them engage w the public: Decreases barriers #NASinterface
  91. @McClurePhD Agreed–hoping that #NASinterface conversations touch on what some of those incentives might be.
  92. #NASInterface Note to Daniel Colon-Ramos: research criticized by Sarah Palin was on Dacus oleae, the olive fruit fly, not Drosophila
  93. #NASInterface Dacus oleae is major CA olive pest; Sarag Palin didn’t know there are many fruitflies when she criticized govt research
  94. I think it’s time to lay to rest the myth of being ostracized by peers for scientists doing scicomm. Sea change noted at #NASinterface
  95. Excited to hear @USDA_NIFA director, Sonny Ramaswamy, discuss how extension can facilitate science communication. #NASinterface
  96. restarting the sustainable infrastructures for life science #scicomm. @blew1000 moderating frictions and momentum session #NASinterface
  97. @blew1000 starts of the next panel with a census of scientific ties being worn by audience. #nasinterface
  98. Bottom line of first #NASinterface panel is passionate scientist-communicators succeed. Do we want to incentivize non-passionate scientists?
  99. do young scientists have to wait until they do their science for a while before they can communicate it? #NASinterface
  100. back with @blew1000‘s moderation of “frictions and momentum” #scicomm. looking forward to these perspectives! #NASinterface
  101. .@RangerRik are the non-passionate scientists? And how many? Do #scicomm disincentives dampen passion to communicate? #nasinterface
  102. 91% of life scientists at Cornell a few years ago, participated in public engagement – from @blew1000 #NASinterface
  103. the concept of “my day job” is coming up quite a bit here today, observes @blew1000 #NASinterface
  104. Hear, hear! MT @RangerRik It’s time to lay to rest the myth of being ostracized by peers for scientists doing scicomm. #NASinterface
  105. callin’ it like it is, @Sonny_NIFA asks “are we just talking to ourselves”#NASinterface #scicomm
  106. Ramaswamy is right: Scientists & science need more prominence in mass media, not in Science & Nature. #NASinterface
  107. Sonny Ramaswamy: A lot of the work we’ve been doing is shrouded in secrecy. We’ve got to figure out a way to better share. #nasinterface
  108. .@USDA_NIFA director: we’re unable to frame what we do in science in a way that avg person can understand #NASinterface
  109. Are journals where scientists communicators should be profiled @Sonny_NIFA? not for public but can help with science culture #NASinterface
  110. Sonny Ramaswamy of @USDA_NIFA encourages us make sure we are not caught in an echo-chamber, but reach out widely #nasinterface
  111. love this from @Sonny_NIFA, #scicomm not an afterthought, comms expertise should be at the table during research inception. #NASinterface
  112. .@Sonny_NIFA notes we put college basketball players on pedestals but not the scientists handling CAFOs & pig poop #NASinterface
  113. .@USDA_NIFA director Ramaswamy: Biggest #NASinterface challenge: inability to frame research in a way that’s accessible to ‘average’ person
  114. Need to communicate ROI of science to public: @USDA_NIFA ‘s Ramaswamy. #NASinterface
  115. i want to talk to @Sonny_NIFA for hours. so agree on points like why are comms people the 1st to go, they should be the last. #NASinterface
  116. .@USDA_NIFA director Ramaswamy points out comparative lack of spending on #scicomm vs. commercial interest. Heard at Sackler 2 #NASinterface
  117. .@USDA_NIFA director: is (land-grant) extension a model for life sciences communication? #NASinterface
  118. @USDA_NIFA director: extension has role to engage and education in all counties in USA #NASinterface
  119. Engage. Transform. Translate. great tenants for #scicomm, these are underpinnings of Extension, from @Sonny_NIFA. #NASinterface
  120. Mission of extension: engage, translate & transform. Bring scientific knowledge to the community. Great model for #SciComm. #NASinterface
  121. YES! MT @brookesimler love this from @Sonny_NIFA, #scicomm expertise should be at the table during research inception. #NASinterface
  122. .@Sonny_NIFA walks us through 140years of #scicomm tools used by cooperative extension. Why is this not more widely known!? #NASinterface
  123. #NASInterface from magic lanterns to moodle, history of extension comm Sonny Ramaswamy
  124. History of extension communication goes from demo farms in 1880’s to Moodles in 2010s #nasinterface
  125. From farmer field schools of the 1870’s to modern day MOOCs @Sonny_NIFA gives history of extension efforts. #NASinterface
  126. Need to make sure knowledge being delivered has impact: Again, wise words from @USDA_NIFA ‘s Ramaswamy #NASinterface
  127. Just because you’re communicating doesn’t mean you’re having an impact. Have to include evaluation in #SciComm. #NASinterface
  128. @Sonny_NIFA #NASinterface makes case for ag extension as model for scicomm. Trained cadre of communicators. Scalable? Effective?
  129. .@RobbyBowles IMO, it’s incumbent on #scicomm pioneers to demonstrate a ROI on these efforts to motivate others. #NASinterface
  130. @Sonny_NIFA #NASinterface: trust in ag extension agent critical to comms success. Does science generally have that tust or relationship?
  131. .@Sonny_NIFA “you can have the greatest Nobel laureate and it means nothing” without trust. So true. #NASinterface
  132. Sonny Ramaswamy slide on evidence-based science communication is great overview. #nasinterface #scicomm pic.twitter.com/2DawJ2Xcjo
  133. “We are trying to make a sales pitch, and we must be trusted to be effective.” What’s the value proposition? @Sonny_NIFA #NASinterface
  134. Twitter brought about serious changes in Egypt and other place but in science, a tweet has not made a difference: Ramaswamy #nasinterface
  135. .@USDA_NIFA director: is there an example in science on where Twitter has made a difference? #NASinterface
  136. “I don’t see where a tweet has made the difference for science” @Sonny_NIFA, #NASinterface
  137. Can anyone respond to this? @Sonny_NIFA: I can’t think of a single Tweet that has had an impact on science. #NASinterface #scicomm
  138. can extension be a model for life science engagement? @Sonny_NIFA says yes.#NASinterface
  139. Sonny made the case for extension of model of science of communication #nasinterface
  140. Censorship as a barrier. @KathF points out that journalists used to be able to walk agencies halls, but no longer can. #NASinterface
  141. .@KathF : journalists often can’t talk to government scientists without PR gatekeepers #NASinterface
  142. sobering perspective from @KathF about restrictions keeping govt officials from really sharing – huge barrier for scientists. #NASinterface
  143. @KathF discussing barrier to communication by government scientists by PIOs #nasinterface
  144. .@RobbyBowles Measure of success will be critical. What’s value prop to public? But also, what’s value prop to scientists? #NASinterface
  145. .@KathF estimates that education/engagement of journalists by federal scientists is down 90% due to public affairs offices #NASinterface
  146. “yes, people free to report might get it wrong…but the official story is not the whole story”, barrier from @KathF #NASinterface
  147. .@KathF throwing gauntlet on censorship of federal scientists. There should be “gushing rivers” of info flowing from govt. #NASinterface
  148. “free speech is the great inducer of accuracy” from @KathF at #NASinterface
  149. Kathryn Foxhall is delivering an indictment of censorship by journalist minders in federal science agencies #NASinterface
  150. .@KathF calls existing PR barriers to federal scientists “toxic” to public health and good and “surveillance” of free speach #NASinterface
  151. MT @Duncande: Kathryn Foxhall delivering indictment of censorship by federal science agencies #NASinterface And is READING it! Communicator?
  152. Amen to that. @brookesimler
    “free speech is the great inducer of accuracy” from @KathF at #NASinterface
  153. .@KathF– silencing policies are at universities too not just the federal government. #NASinterface
  154. .@KathF To federal agencies: “Be there for reporters to get the official story.” #NASinterface
  155. If a reporter does get it wrong – let them know! they get very few responsible responses from @KathF #NASinterface
  156. During break, @RangerRik tells us that DC Science Writers was founded in response to @KathF‘s story about HIV reporting #nasinterface
  157. Back after a lunch break for more on frictions and momentum in science communication #nasinterface
  158. We’ve come a long way – just heard speaker say that decades ago “Public engagement was considered a distraction from our work” #NASinterface
  159. Underlying question for #NASinterface: is there an unserved audience for scicomm? Is it attentive?
  160. .@philneed‘s paraphase of henry kissinger about why academic meetings are too intense “stakes are too small” mtgs = barrier. #nasinterface
  161. .@RobbyBowles I believe we are in the process of capturing those metrics. May be too soon. Risk takers will lead the way. #nasinterface
  162. Brown bag lunches & journal clubs worked great to show scientists how to communicate and think on their feet: Needleman #nasinterface
  163. Barriers to public comm of scicomm #NASinterface moot if no interested public to communicate to. Have we satisfied current interest?
  164. in the medical field, proprietary concerns are a barrier to #scicomm, from @philneed #nasinterface
  165. Phil Needlman, Barrier to #scicomm 4 industrial research – you must develop intellectual property in secret to be competitive #NASinterface
  166. Agreed – many are making engagement a priority, but plenty are still strongly discouraged @jackcschultz #NASinterface
  167. .@RobbyBowles And BTW, in a risk taking environment, there’ll be casualties. But, it takes a culture of failure to innovate. #nasinterface
  168. @chadenglish Many many don’t understand the value. That’s changing bco socioeconomic pressures. #NASinterface
  169. #NASinterface P. Needlman now talking about communicating science via community centers–can allow reach to wide, underserved audience(s).
  170. .@philneed warns not to overstate science with example of folks touting #stemcell cure for Alzheimer’s as public disservice. #NASinterface
  171. Diane Harley’s research on academic promotion: online print is heavily consumed, but promotion based on print publication. #NASinterface
  172. Diane Hartley is speaking on what is valued in academic reputation = peer-reviewed archival publications #nasinterface
  173. Diane Harley’s research confirms “Peer Review is the Coin of the Realm”, is there flexibility? #NASinterface
  174. @jackcschultz @RangerRik Right. Maybe we can learn from them (but maintain integrity of message). How should b question for #NASinterface
  175. #nasinterface Scis value pubs. BUT no one became a scientist b/c they wanted to publish in Nature. Need to unearth that original motivation
  176. “making a name for oneself” is part of academic promotion. This is traditional peer review (Harley) Can it also be engagement? #NASinterface
  177. Policymakers yes (but not in a simple way, and hard to unlock). Would journalists would see it as a conflict? @RangerRik #NASinterface
  178. Awesome! MT @GoodbyeShoe: #nasinterface Scis value pubs. BUT no one became a scientist b/c they wanted to publish in Nature.
  179. Harley’s talk brings evidence to discussion about the culture of science around public outreach #nasinterface
  180. At #NASinterface how to reconcile science journo in freefall with posited but unproven (IMHO) public interest in scicomm?
  181. Harley: Wide definition of “public engagement”–partnering w/ industry, K-12, MOOCs, etc. #NASinterface Do researchers see ISE as option?
  182. @brossardd speaking on scientists interaction with mass media staring global, then will drill down to U.S. #nasinterface
  183. .@brossardd: from 2005 study of biomedical scientists, 69% had some recent engagement w/journalists #NASinterface
  184. From @brossardd: scientists and journalist interact more than thought (and felt it was positive) #NASinterface pic.twitter.com/xgOt2NoyuB
  185. .@brossardd : impact on careers of scientists’ interactions w/journalists was generally positive and helpful for career #nasinterface
  186. Variables that contribute to scientists interaction with media = status, training, self-efficacy and intrinsic reward #nasinterface #scicomm
  187. @brossardd pointing out that her 6 year old data about mass media interactions are dated due to the rise of social media #nasinterface
  188. No gender diff in data by Broussard at #NASinterface on how and why scientists engage w traditional media. Surprising.
  189. @brossardd find 18% of scientists have blogged at UW, which is mcu higher than the 1% creator expected by Jakob Nielsen #nasinterface
  190. In good way @RangerRik: No gender diff in data by @brossardd at #NASinterface on how/why scientists engage w traditional media. Surprising.
  191. @GeneticsGSA Would love to hear more about this if you can. One main blog? How did Madison get this level of engagement? etc. #NASinterface
  192. .@brossard answers @Sonny_NIFA about what good does it do to tweet?in citations and increased intrxns with reporters! #NASInterface
  193. @brossardd finding that 18% of UW scientists have blogged much higher than the 1% of creators expected by Jakob Neilson #NASInterface
  194. DATA! @brossardd presents data that scientists interacting on Twitter DOES increase impact. #NASinterface
  195. .@brossardd: interaction of scientists w/reporters and mention of research on twitter associated with higher h-index #NASinterface
  196. @brossard we need more data, especiaaly with advent of social media #NASInterface
  197. It’s no longer IF scientists should engage in social media, but HOW to do it effectively – @brossardd #NASinterface
  198. our @COMPASSonline experience in line w/ @Sonny_NIFA: engaging comms people at research inception helps ask right questions. #NASinterface
  199. #NASinterface FINALLY some data from Brossard showing positive relationship between H-value and Twitter use.
  200. @jackcschultz @chadenglish @brossardd @concaff yup. Harley and Brossard both demonstrated there’s still LOTS of variability #NASinterface