Sci-comm “behind the scenes”: Gendered narratives of scientific outreach activities in the life sciences

This preLight was created as part of the 2024 SciCommConnect writing sprint session, moderated by Martin Estermann. Participants: Chiara Pompili, Safieh Shah, Jimeng Li, Vaishnavi Sridhar, Anindita

Background:

Science communication is the practice of informing, educating and raising awareness of science-related topics. It involves conveying scientific concepts, methods, findings, and implications to various audiences, including the general public, policymakers, educators, students, and other scientists. Effective communication can bridge the gap between the scientific community and the public, fostering a society that values and understands the importance of science.

Despite the critical role of science communication, the academic community often views it as a secondary or support activity, lacking in both recognition and financial compensation. In this preprint, the authors used surveys to understand the various perspectives of engaging in sci-comm activities in different Australian life science organizations. The surveys were set up to better understand who is involved in sci-comm work, in what capacity, and why.

Key findings

1) Most people involved in sci-comm activities are early or mid-career researchers:

Eighty-six percent of the participants in this study were early or mid-career researchers, indicating a potential generational gap in the field of science communication. The sci-comm activities these researchers are involved in include the production of newsletters or posters, public speaking, social media manadgment, administration, advertising, event organising, or journal editing.

2) Women experience a lack of recognition for their science communication efforts:

The majority of respondents did not attribute their involvement in science communication activities to advancements in their academic careers. Also, they expressed a lack of recognition for their efforts in this area. Notably, women reported perceiving even less career value in science communication activities compared to men.

3) Despite the lack of benefits, researchers involved in sci-comm activities are willing to continue their efforts:

Despite the lack of benefits, most participants expressed a willingness to continue their science communication tasks. They recognized benefits in other professional areas, such as improved public speaking and social skills, and derived personal satisfaction from educating and inspiring future generations in STEM. In some cases, science communication activities even helped participants to win major awards, grants, and scholarships.

Why we choose this preprint:

There is a significant disparity between the perceived importance of science communication and how it is actually acknowledged in practice. Although these perceptions may be evident in everyday experiences, it is noteworthy that this trend is consistent across different parts of the world. This preprint is crucial in highlighting the “behind the scenes” work of science communication. It could lead to future improvements within the science community by generating training opportunities and educating researchers on how to leverage science communication to improve their career skills.

Future directions / questions for the authors:

• Given that perceptions of science communication may vary based on social and economic factors, do you plan to expand this research to other academic settings and countries? Additionally, will you publicly release the questionnaire so that these questions can be explored globally?
• As the majority of respondants were working in the entomology field, do you plan to expand this research to other disciplines, particularly, those with a larger gender gap?

doi: https://doi.org/10.1242/prelights.37838

(1 votes)