Science Communication

Trust in science is both a goal and prerequisite for science communication. While participatory methods are claimed to build this trust, supporting evidence remains limited. In an online experiment (N = 725), we investigated how different levels of participation in designing an article impact message credibility, trustworthiness, and trust intention toward a scientist. Active participation enhanced perceptions of the scientist’s benevolence and integrity but not their expertise or message credibility. Prior participation intentions moderated most effects. Conversely, awareness of others’ participation increased trust intention. These findings highlight the complexity of trust in science and the need for tailored participatory approaches.

Ethical issues arise in many communication and engagement settings. Such issues can, however, fall into the gaps between what is seen as “research” and what is seen as “dissemination.” Semi-structured interviews (n = 17) and focus groups (n = 2) with researchers and science communication and public engagement specialists at U.K. academic institutions and in practice settings suggest that while normative principles for ethical science communication remain fluid, ethical questions are often an area of considerable reflection for those communicating, particularly when they reflect wider social issues and different people in the process: communities, researchers, and institutions.

Perceived source credibility is fundamental to effective science communication. Recent years, however, have seen science become polarized and expert authority erode, complicating the notion that credibility equals persuasion. Two experiments address this tension, focusing on subcomponents of perceived source credibility—expertise and trustworthiness—for expert (N = 474) and nonexpert sources (N = 411). By manipulating the order by which participants learn about the source’s position on a scientific topic relative to their qualifications, the findings delineate when and how source credibility cues influence science communication, introducing nuance to the idea that credible sources can effectively communicate about value-laden topics.

Scientists face increasing expectations to engage in public communication. Using role identity theory, this qualitative interview study explores how experienced STEM researchers in Germany integrate these expectations into their professional role identities, where conflicts and intersections arise, and which factors influence these processes. Findings reveal that while some scientists integrate communication demands with core professional roles (e.g., research, teaching), others perceive them part of external administrative burdens, leading to resistance. The results imply that the increasing obligations for scientists’ engagement in science communication should be closer aligned with their central identity standards.