Source: Schäferle Briefly analysed
We don’t like to talk about authority at work. It accompanies and influences collaboration subconsciously. This is also the case in science communication when researchers and practitioners meet. It can happen that only scientists determine what is communicated. This should be considered. For effective SciComm collaboration, reflection, and talking about communication is crucial.
Influence The level of SciComm is related to authority, among other things. It influences the communication. Here you can read why practitioners and scientists should think about this.
“No parting in the world is harder than parting with power.” That’s a quote from Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Perigord (1754-1838). He was a diplomat during the French Revolution. In all areas of our lives, we are confronted with authority. Once certain people have achieved authority, they find it difficult to get away from it. In all cases authority is based on dependency, which is also present in science communication. Authority influences communication. Unfortunately, too little is said about it.
Forms of authority
Authority manifests itself on different levels. For this article, authority is considered under the structural and hierarchical aspect. “Hierarchical” means the order within a department. The head of the department is more senior than the employee. She or he determines more because of her or his position. Structural authority is defined as the following: People with a higher degree or in a higher position define more or are heard more because of their higher education. They can dictate what should be perceived by the public.
Researchers expand knowledge about the world with their findings. This knowledge can either be communicated or withheld. Scientists determine what is communicated to the public. If communicated often research results are made public. A lot of times the public doesn’t find out how these results are produced. Researchers have become more transparent in recent years. Nevertheless, the structural authority of researchers influences communication.
Communication on own channels
For older scientists, their main task is research. They don’t see the need to share their research with the public. It’s about publishing papers and being active in the scientific community to get research funding. The fact that SciComm is suitable for drawing attention to research has only become apparent in recent years. Especially young scientists communicate on their own channels.
Authority supersedes expertise
A wide variety of professional groups work together in SciComm. Bias towards certain professions, but also the hierarchical arrangement in the team can influence communication. For example, when one scientist determines what is communicated, it displaces the expertise of others. Practitioners have access to knowledge that researchers do not have. They know which topics should be communicated to the target group. If their knowledge is not sufficiently appreciated, the effect of communication can be minimized.
Science needs communication experts. They are trained in communication. Scientists do not have the time to read up on this in addition to their research. Professionalism is required if SciComm is to reach the target group. It would therefore make sense for researchers to perceive practitioners as equal discussion partners.
Mutual interest, more fruitfulness
It is much better to work together, to talk to each other and to reflect. In this way, everyone can contribute what expectations he or she has and what the goal of communication is. Because: All knowledge is equally valuable.