ASC2020 - 16-19 Feb, Melbourne

by

Communication practices of government organisations for environmental health risks from chemical pollution: A scoping review

Government organisations play a critical role in communicating risks and health protective actions in response to environmental hazards. Globally, exposure of the public to environmental hazards, such as chemical pollution, causes significant adverse health outcomes. Effective communication can reduce the public’s exposure to these hazards, minimising the health and psychological impacts.

While a large number of studies have investigated how to improve risk communication, there appears to be comparatively limited research focusing on the practices of those communicating risk, such as government organisations, compared to the wealth of research focusing on those receiving the messages. This is a significant gap considering the important role communicators play in encouraging the public to respond to environmental hazards. There is no doubt that audience-focused research is important. However, to improve the effectiveness of communication efforts there is also the need to better understand the communicators and gain insights into communication practices, decision-making and organisational factors influencing communication efforts.

As a first step to address this gap, a scoping review was undertaken to identify the existing research looking at the practice of risk communication by government organisations. Peer-reviewed papers investigating communicators, or individuals assisting with communicating, from government organisations were included. The review focused on communication relating to chemical pollution, but also considered general environmental health communication. Analysis the reviewed papers identified key factors influencing government organisations’ communications of risks. This presentation will outline the results of the scoping review and highlight potential areas for future studies.

Session

Communication Strategies to Mitigate Risk

Presenters

Madeleine Thomas, PhD Student, Monash University & Environment Protection Authority Victoria

 

When: In sessionWednesday 19th February, 1:50pm-2:35pm

Where: Room G01, Learning and Teaching Building, 19 Ancora Imparo Way, Clayton
Hashtag: TBC

by

Selecting the right tool for the job: communication technologies for dispersed multinational scientific teams

Research in developing countries often involves teams of scientists from developing and developed countries, who use information and communication technologies (ICTs) to communicate between dispersed team members. These scientists come from different cultures and language groups and live in varying economic and political environments.

I investigated the utility and useability of nine ICTs, including social media, email and websites used by teams of agricultural scientists from Lao PDR and Australia, using an intercultural heuristic evaluation tool, or I-CHET. I found that asynchronous ICTs such as email were preferred by non-native English speakers, while synchronous media such as instant messaging and Skype presented considerable problems between team members from different cultures and language groups.

Most ICTs evaluated in the study demonstrated little consideration for non-native English speakers and for inexperienced ICTs users. However, all evaluated ICTs demonstrated the ability to transmit information and encourage communication between information users in scientific collaborations.

The I-CHET assessment tool highlights the ongoing need for a ‘toolbox’ of communication ICTs for research collaborations that can be adapted to suit the cultural and professional needs of multinational teams, worldwide.

Session

Communication Delivery Methods

Presenter

Wesley Ward, Researcher, Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University

 

When: In session Wednesday 19th February, 11:00am–12:50pm

Where: Room G01, Learning and Teaching Building, 19 Ancora Imparo Way, Clayton
Hashtag:

 

by

Effective communication of uncertainty for hazards and risk: identifying decision-relevant information

Disaster risk management requires effective communication of complex technical information: in pre-event planning and mitigation, in response activities and during recovery processes. These range from technical risk assessments to impact projections, and simulations of the outcomes of recovery and adaptation decisions.

Each relies on a suite of numerical models, from models of the hazard (e.g., tsunami) to economic projections of decision impacts. Many novel processes exist to communicate these models to both the public and decision makers in policy and practice settings.

However, how we communicate the uncertainty inherent to these models remains a challenge. Non-communication of uncertainties is problematic: interdependencies between event characteristics over time create evolving uncertainties that can eclipse any simulated outcome uncertainties.

We review the literature covering the many challenges of communicating uncertainty, and present the findings of a metasynthesis literature review for effective communication of model uncertainties. Themes identified include:

  1. clear typologies to identify and communicate uncertainties,
  2. effective engagement with users to identify uncertainties to focus on and when,
  3. managing ensembles, confidence, bias, consensus and dissensus,
  4. methods for communicating uncertainties., e.g., maps, graphs, time, and
  5. the lack of evaluation of many approaches currently in use.

We propose communicators move from a one-way dissemination of advice, towards two-way and participatory approaches that identify decision-relevant uncertainty and data information needs pre-event, via a shared uncertainty management scheme. This will help identify what communication efforts should focus on during a crisis, and thus enhance situation awareness and data sharing throughout the disaster cycle.

Session

Communication Strategies to Mitigate Risk

Presenting author:

Emma Hudson-Doyle, Senior Lecturer, Joint Centre for Disaster Research, Massey University (New Zealand)

Co-authors:

Douglas Paton, Professor, College of Health and Human Sciences, Charles Darwin University
David Johnston, Professor, Senior Scientist, GNS Science (New Zealand’s Geological Survey), Massey University (New Zealand)
Richard Smith, Director, Resilience to Nature’s Challenges, GNS Science (New Zealand)

 

When: In session Wednesday 19th February,1:50pm-2:35pm

Where: Room G01, Learning and Teaching Building, 19 Ancora Imparo Way, Clayton
Hashtag:

by

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

by

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

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

When we look around, science communication is everywhere. You see it in museums, in television documentaries, in newspapers, on the radio, in science magazines, social media and the growth in citizen science. But how do we know whether any given effort in communicating science among public audiences is effective? And by which aims and objectives are those efforts measured?

This session will feature research case studies exploring knowledge, beliefs and perceptions and provide insights to improve science communication practice and impact evaluation.

The session is structured into five 15-minute talks and will wrap-up with a 15-minute Q&A for delegates questions and comments.

The session will include the following talks:

Session Producer

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

Session Chair

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

by

Unlocking curious minds: Promoting climate change knowledge and efficacy beliefs among students from lower decile schools

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

Currently, we know little if youth are aware of climate change, understand its scientific causes or consequences, and potential solutions. In addition, science teachers’ needs assessment is largely lacking in developing science communication efforts. Based on a collaboration with head of science teachers in five lower decile schools, short and simple animations were developed based on best science communication practises. In particular, social cognitive theory (e.g., Bandura, 1995, 2000) was applied, to focus not only on climate impacts but also to increase self- and collective efficacy beliefs of students that they can individually and collectively act to mitigate and adapt to climate change. The five short videos featured animations on (1) how do we know climate change is happening, (2) how do we determine the impacts of climate change locally, and (3) what solutions will best help mitigate and adapt to climate change. Further, two local climate scientists were featured in separate videos as they are considered the most trusted source of information for the public, aligning with deference to authority theory (e.g., Brossard & Nisbet, 2007; Brossard, 2013). These videos were developed as a resource to local science teachers to adapt in various classes. Based on pre-post survey of 150 high school students following exposure to the videos, we found that the intervention increased students’ knowledge about anthropogenic climate change, belief in scientific consensus, and in particular, their individual and collective efficacies to come together and act on climate change. The science teachers also mentioned using the videos in other classes. The intervention indicates the potential for a collaborative effort between science communication experts, climate scientists, and local science teachers to be able to engage and elevate students’ knowledge and efficacy beliefs about climate change. This research also found the dwindling resources for science teachers needs to be met such local interventions to help teachers better address current science issues. The success of the intervention indicates the effectiveness of localised campaigns in affecting change.

Session

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

Presenter

Jagadish Thaker, Lecturer at the School of Communication, Journalism and Marketing, Massey University

Co-Author
Daniel Rimmer

by

The risky business of communication risk (or what to do when normal communications no longer work)

When: Thursday 15th November, 12:00pm – 4:45pm (including lunch)
Where: Powerhouse Museum, 500 Harris St, Ultimo
Room: L3, Level 2 to the left of the registration/foyer area, down the hallway and through the doors on the right

In this workshop you will examine the theory behind risk communication, and learn how to apply it in practice. We will use case studies and shared learnings to develop risk communication frameworks for people’s own professional situations that you can then apply in your workplace.

Workshop presenter

Craig Cormick, Science Communicator and Writer

Purchase separately or free for conference+workshop delegates (RSVP during registration).

Register now!

**This is a public event. Register to save your seat!**

Share on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/events/242782939725080/

by

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring new and social media

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

Science communication has evolved with the prevalence of new media, bringing opportunities for scientists and communicators to interact with their audiences in new ways. But what is the value of investing time, money and effort into these new and innovative ways of communicating science? What are the impacts and what works best?

This session will feature research exploring new media and social media and provide insights to improve science communication practice and impact evaluation.

The session is structured into five 15-minute talks and will wrap-up with a 15-minute Q&A for delegates questions and comments.

The session will include the following talks:

Session Producer, Session Chair

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

by

Designing methodologies with impact

When: Wednesday 14th November, 2:40pm – 3:40pm

Different approaches and processes can be implemented as part of a research project – but the best approach is the one that will get you the most accurate assessment! This workshop will address best practice approaches to designing research programs that combine scientific rigour with practical efficiency. We will look at the philosophy underpinning different approaches and how and when different techniques should be used.

Presenter

Clifford Lewis, Lecturer, Charles Sturt University

by

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

 

Australian Science Communicators

About ASC.

@auscicomm

ASC on Facebook

Questions? Please contact Kali on asc2020@asc.asn.au.

Acknowledgements

© 2020 Australian Science Communicators

Editor Login.

MAJOR SPONSOR

Monash Sustainability Development Institute

MEDIA SPONSORS

SUPPORTED BY

NETWORKING EVENTS SPONSORS