Gap between science and media revisited: scientists as public communicators

Abstract

The present article presents an up-to-date account of the current media relations of scientists, based on a comprehensive analysis of relevant surveys. The evidence suggests that most scientists consider visibility in the media important and responding to journalists a professional duty--an attitude that is reinforced by universities and other science organizations. Scientific communities continue to regulate media contacts with their members by certain norms that compete with the motivating and regulating influences of public information departments. Most scientists assume a two-arena model with a gap between the arenas of internal scientific and public communication. They want to meet the public in the public arena, not in the arena of internal scientific communication. Despite obvious changes in science and in the media system, the orientations of scientists toward the media, as well as the patterns of interaction with journalists, have their roots in the early 1980s. Although there is more influence on public communication from the science organizations and more emphasis on strategic considerations today, the available data do not indicate abrupt changes in communication practices or in the relevant beliefs and attitudes of scientists in the past 30 y. Changes in the science-media interface may be expected from the ongoing structural transformation of the public communication system. However, as yet, there is little evidence of an erosion of the dominant orientation toward the public and public communication within the younger generation of scientists.

Keywords: mass media; science communication; science journalism.

Fig. 1.

Frequency of media contacts of different samples of researchers. Distribution of answers to the question “In the past 3 y, have you had professional contact with journalists from the general mass media face-to-face, by phone, or by mail/fax/e-mail?” Methodological details of the surveys are provided in SI Methods.

Fig. 2.

Frequency of media contacts of German researchers (n = 1,600) by research field. The question wording is identical to that in Fig. 1. Methodological details of the survey are provided in SI Methods.

Fig. 3.

Perceived impact of media visibility of scientists on their scientific reputation. The question was: “If the media report on scientists and their research, does this have a positive or negative impact on the scientific reputation among colleagues in your area of research?” Methodological details of the surveys are provided in SI Methods.

Fig. 4.

Norms of the scientific community regarding interactions with the media. Answers of US neuroscientists (n = 216) and German neuroscientists (n = 241) to the question: “Under what conditions do colleagues in your research area consider it to be acceptable for scientists to talk about scientific topics in the media?” Methodological details of the surveys are provided in SI Methods.

Fig. 5.

Consultation requirements of scientists before media interactions. Answers of US neuroscientists (n = 216) and German neuroscientists (n = 241) to the question: “If you want to talk to a journalist about your research, whom do you have to consult in advance?” Methodological details of the surveys are provided in SI Methods.