Comparing science communication theory with practice: an assessment and critique using Australian data
Abstract
Scholars have variously described different models of science communication over the past 20 years. However, there has been little assessment of theorised models against science communication practice. This article compares 515 science engagement activities recorded in a 2012 Australian audit against the theorised characteristics of the three dominant models of deficit, dialogue and participation. Most engagement activities had objectives that reflected a mix of deficit and dialogue activities. Despite increases in scientific controversies like climate change, there appears to be a paucity of participatory activities in Australia. Those that do exist are mostly about people being involved with science through activities like citizen science. These participatory activities appear to coexist with and perhaps even depend on deficit activities. Science communication scholars could develop their models by examining the full range of objectives for engagement found in practice and by recognising that any engagement will likely include a mix of approaches.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Technologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science
Jasanoff, S. (2003) · Minerva · doi:10.1023/a:1025557512320 · Cited by 1,004 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dempster, G., Sutherland, G., & Keogh, L. (2022) · Journal of Science Communication · doi:10.22323/2.21010206 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
- Authors
- Metcalfe, J.
- Affiliations
- Australian National University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Metcalfe, Jenni
- ORCID
- Metcalfe, Jenni
- Venue
- Public Understanding of Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-02-12
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 382-400
- ISSN
- 0963-6625 (ISSN-L)
- 1361-6609
- OpenAlex
- W2911721455
- Cited by
- 138
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 26.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Public Understanding of Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
- Keywords
- science communication models, deficit model, dialogue model, participation model, public engagement with science, citizen science, climate change controversy, science communication practice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review