Factors Affecting Science Communication by Scientists and Engineers Survey of Academic Scientists and Engineers Dr Suzanne King People Science & Policy Ltd

The Survey The Royal Society The Research Councils The Wellcome Trust

The Survey Web-based survey of 1485 research scientists and engineers in UK HEIs Additional samples of –RC unit staff –Wellcome Trust fellows –Royal Society fellows 41 follow-up in-depth telephone interviews Interviews with national stakeholder organisations

What did public engagement mean? Promote public understanding of science (34%) Highlight implications, relevance and value of science (15%) Listening and understanding the public (13%)

What was the purpose of public engagement? Better informed public (35%) Least important reasons: –Contribute to ethical discussions (5%) –Recruit students (4%)

What had they done in the past year? 74% had taken part in at least one science communication activity

Who was the audience? Policy-makers (60%) Schools and teachers (50%) Industry (47%) NGOs (34%) Media (33%)

How active had they been in the last year? 11% very active (more than 10 activities) 63% active (1-10 activities) 26% inactive (no activities) 47% wanted to spend more time on public engagement When asked an open question ‘why’ - 66% said because scientists should engage with the community 3% wanted to do less public engagement

Who did public engagement? Those with communication training Senior researchers Those over 40 Government and charity funded researchers Clinical and non-bioscience researchers Those in departments rated 1-5 in the RAE Those in research only positions

What would encourage you to get (more) involved?

The need for an infrastructure 21% if someone else initiated it they would get involved 39% very/fairly difficult to get involved

The need for culture change Time away from research (70%) Career depends on RAE and bringing in money to department Scientists who do PE less well regarded by peers (20% agreed but 54% disagreed) Reinforced negative stereotypes of women