This document summarizes different models of science communication that have evolved over the past 20 years. It discusses models such as the popularization and dissemination model, strategic communication model, public engagement and dialogue model, and stakeholder driven science and lay expertise model. For each model, it provides brief descriptions of their key aspects and potential benefits as well as some criticisms or challenges. The overall document aims to outline the landscape of approaches that have been taken to facilitate communication between scientists and the public on various issues.

1. Twenty Years of Evolving Models of Science Communication
@MCNisbet
Matthew C. Nisbet
Associate Professor
School of Communication
American University
Washington D.C.
The Sharing Science Conference
University of British Columbia 03.29.14

2. The Popularization and Dissemination Model
@MCNisbet
 Engages a core audience of science
enthusiasts who can comment, share, and
repurpose.
 Can reach through incidental exposure non-
attentive, broader publics.
 Can shape the decisions and thinking of
policymakers, journalists and funders.
 For scientists, can build personal
brand, increase citation impact, influence
scientific peers, and develop skills and
experience.

3. Popularization & The Cycle of Hype
@MCNisbet
 Emphasis by funding agencies on broader
impacts puts pressure on scientists and
institutions to “oversell” their findings.
 Media coverage emphasizes near term societal
benefits and market development with less
emphasis on uncertainty and possible risks.
 Hype risks credibility and trust in science and
may undermine ability to do basic research.
 Increasingly defines science and higher
education in terms of economic development and
job growth.

4. More Scientific Knowledge = More Disagreement?
@MCNisbetNisbet, M.C. & Markowitz, E. (2014). Understanding Public Opinion in Debates Over Biomedical Research: Looking Beyond
Partisanship to Focus on Beliefs about Science and Society. PLoS ONE 9(2): e88473.

5. More Carl Sagans?
Social Identity and Communication Behavior
@MCNisbet

6. More Carl Sagans?
Social Identity and Communication
@MCNisbet
Nisbet, M.C. & Markowitz, E. (in press). Experts in an Age of Polarization: Evaluating Scientists’ Engagement with
Politics and Civic Life. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.

7. The Strategic Communication Model
Messaging By Audience Segment and By Way of Opinion Leaders
@MCNisbet

8. Strategic Communication Campaigns:
Frictions and Trade-Offs
@MCNisbet
 Raises questions about conflict of interest and
manipulation.
 Difficulty coordinating message strategy across
groups and organizations.
 Often serves to increase polarization and divisions.
Increased targeting = increased echo chambers.
 Does strategic communication lead to effective
policy?
 Under what conditions does broader public matter
to policymaking?
 Defines public as spectators, consumers or voters
but not as active participants in decisions.

9. Public Engagement and Dialogue Model:
Deliberative Forums, Public Meetings, Digital News Forums
@MCNisbet
Seeks to “democratize” the governance of science
and technology.
 Can enhance civic capacity of regions, creating
opportunities to debate and collaborate.
Can increase participant trust and
knowledge, soften group differences and
polarization.
Informs policy options, adapts knowledge to
localized contexts or specialized cases.
Questions regarding representativeness and
reach, giving visibility to minority views, or criticized
as just another “public relations” strategy.

10. Worldwide Views on Biodiversity
@MCNisbet

11. Stakeholder Driven Science and Lay Expertise Model
@MCNisbet
Research that effectively addresses the needs of
society requires “co-production” with public.
Emphasis on research that is useable, problem
solving and socially acceptable; aligning research
efforts with national, state or local needs.
Promotes enhanced trust, appreciation and
support for research institution among
public, stakeholders and policymakers.
Can be time consuming, resource
intensive, “messy,” does not fit easily with
traditional collaboration, publication and credit
model.

12. www.ClimateShiftProject.org/NASInterface
@MCNisbet