We have witnessed an increasing amount of science podcasts, and it has emerged as an important venue for science communication. From a strategic science communication perspective, this study investigated how science podcasters view science communication–related goals and objectives, as well as the tactics they use in producing science communication content based on the theory of planned behavior. A survey (N = 147) with science podcasters showed that they see excitement and interest in science as their most prioritized objective and present the value of science over time. In addition, our results showed that podcasters frequently use communication tactics, but it may not have resulted from planned strategic communication action. The findings of this study provide initial insight into podcasters’ views and practice as part of the science communication effort.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
2.
BaeslerE. J. (1997). Persuasive effects of story and statistical evidence. Argumentation and Advocacy, 33(4), 170–175.
3.
BesleyJ. C.DudoA.YuanS. (2018). Scientists’ views about communication objectives. Public Understanding of Science, 27(6), 708–730.
4.
BesleyJ. C.DudoA.YuanS.AbiGhannamN. (2016). Qualitative interviews with science communication trainers about communication objectives and goals. Science Communication, 38(3), 356–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547016645640
5.
BesleyJ. C.O’HaraK.DudoA. (2019). Strategic science communication as planned behavior: Understanding scientists’ willingness to choose specific tactics. PLOS ONE, 14(10), Article e0224039.
6.
BotanC. (2006). Grand strategy, strategy, and tactics in public relations. In BotanC.HazletonV. (Eds.), Public relations theory II (pp. 223–247). Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
DahlstromM. F. (2014). Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(Supplement 4), 13614–13620.
8.
DaintonM.ZelleyE. D. (2017). Applying communication theory for professional life: A practical introduction. SAGE.
9.
de BruinW. B.BostromA. (2013). Assessing what to address in science communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Supplement 3), 14062–14068.
10.
DiMaggioP. J.PowellW. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
11.
DudoA.BesleyJ. C. (2016). Scientists’ prioritization of communication objectives for public engagement. PLOS ONE, 11(2), Article e0148867.
12.
EkströmM. (2000). Information, storytelling and attractions: TV journalism in three modes of communication. Media, Culture & Society, 22(4), 465–492.
13.
FischhoffB. (2013). The sciences of science communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Supplement 3), 14033–14039.
14.
FishbeinM.AjzenI. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Psychology Press.
15.
GrayJ. B. (2009). The power of storytelling: Using narrative in the healthcare context. Journal of Communication in Healthcare, 2(3), 258–273.
16.
HoS. S.LiaoY.RosenthalS. (2015). Applying the theory of planned behavior and media dependency theory: Predictors of public pro-environmental behavioral intentions in Singapore. Environmental Communication, 9(1), 77–99.
17.
JarreauP. B. (2015). Science bloggers’ self-perceived communication roles. Journal of Science Communication, 14(4), Article A02.
18.
JarreauP. B.PorterL. (2018). Science in the social media age: Profiles of science blog readers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(1), 142–168.
19.
JohnsonM. D.AyersK. A. (2016). Science sound bites, a podcast for STEM curriculum supplementation. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 17(2), 286–287.
20.
KendallR. (1996). Public relations campaigns strategies: Planning for implementation. Allyn & Bacon.
21.
KoetsenruijterA. W. M. (2011). Using numbers in news increases story credibility. Newspaper Research Journal, 32(2), 74–82.
22.
LindgrenM. (2016). Personal narrative journalism and podcasting. Radio Journal: International Studies in Broadcast & Audio Media, 14(1), 23–41.
23.
LuH.SchuldtJ. P. (2015). Exploring the role of incidental emotions in support for climate change policy. Climatic Change, 131(4), 719–726.
24.
MacKenzieL. E. (2019). Science podcasts: Analysis of global production and output from 2004 to 2018. Royal Society Open Science, 6(1), Article 180932.
25.
MakriA. (2017). Give the public the tools to trust scientists. Nature News, 541(7637), Article 261.
26.
McClungS.JohnsonK. (2010). Examining the motives of podcast users. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 17(1), 82–95.
27.
MeyerJ. C. (2000). Humor as a double-edged sword: Four functions of humor in communication. Communication Theory, 10, 310–331.
28.
MontañoD. E.KasprzykD. (2015). Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior, and the integrated behavioral model. Health Behavior, 70(4), Article 231.
29.
MouY.LinC. A. (2015). Exploring podcast adoption intention via perceived social norms, interpersonal communication, and theory of planned behavior. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59(3), 475–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2015.1054997
30.
NabiR. L. (2003). Exploring the framing effects of emotion: Do discrete emotions differentially influence information accessibility, information seeking, and policy preference?Communication Research, 30(2), 224–247.
31.
NwosuA. C.MonneryD.ReidV. L.ChapmanL. (2017). Use of podcast technology to facilitate education, communication, and dissemination in palliative care: The development of the AmiPal podcast. BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care, 7(2), 212–217.
PicardiI.ReginaS. (2008). Science via podcast. Journal of Science Communication, 7(2), Article C05.
34.
PotterD. (2006). iPod, you pod, we all pod: Eager to lure news consumers, media outlets are experimenting with news-on-demand podcasts. They’re fun, fresh and often unpolished. American Journalism Review, 28(1), 64–65.
SturgisP.AllumN. (2004). Science in society: Re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understanding of Science, 13(1), 55–74.
37.
TsagkiasM.LarsonM.de RijkeM. (2010). Predicting podcast preference: An analysis framework and its application. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61, 374–391. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21259
38.
Turner-McGrievyG.KalyanaramanS.CampbellM. K. (2013). Delivering health information via podcast or web: Media effects on psychosocial and physiological responses. Health Communication, 28(2), 101–109.
39.
Van WitsenA. (2020). How daily journalists use numbers and statistics: The case of global average temperature. Journalism Practice, 14(9), 1047–1065.
40.
WangX. (2009). Integrating the theory of planned behavior and attitude functions: Implications for health campaign design. Health Communication, 24(5), 426–434.
41.
WilcoxD. L.CameronG. T.ReberB. H. (2016). Public relations: Strategies and tactics (11th ed.). Pearson.
42.
YuanS.OshitaT.AbiGhannamN.DudoA.BesleyJ. C.KohH. E. (2017). Two-way communication between scientists and the public: A view from science communication trainers in North America. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 7(4), 341–355.
