Abstract
ABSTRACTThere is an ongoing tension for scientists when deciding to engage with the public about their research as many scientists view direct participation as peripheral to their role. Pressures of time, lack of support by management and a lack of communicative skills are identified by scientists as reasons for not committing to communicative initiatives. We aimed to explore and explain the organizational culture of a research community that activity communicates with the public and has an international research culture. The Centre for Brain Research (CBR) was identified as a model and was analyzed using the concept of Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS). Twelve participants (scientists (8), clinicians (1), community liaison people (2)) and an identified director of the organization were interviewed. Direct quotes from interview were used to provide examples of the characteristics of CAS for example a variety of agents interacting, adapting the learning within the organization, non-linear dynamic behavior that is a result of aggregates of groups with actions emerging from self-organizing behavior and the development of an emergent culture. This analysis showed that complexity theory was a suitable framework for analyzing the sustainable communicative organization within CBR.
Highlights
It has long been acknowledged that significant public engagement with scientists will not happen without scientists receiving full recognition for their efforts and a supportive infrastructure being provided in which such engagement can take place
In the BA/Royal Society survey (2006), the majority (64%) of the group of 1485 survey respondents believed that taking part in a public engagement activity detracted from the time they would spend on research and was a major drawback to them taking part
Lewin and Regine (1998) argue that the management within such organisations is undergoing a paradigm shift from the more traditional linear, hierarchical organisation, to a model built on the principles of complexity theory
Summary
It has long been acknowledged that significant public engagement with scientists will not happen without scientists receiving full recognition for their efforts and a supportive infrastructure being provided in which such engagement can take place. The importance of these factors was highlighted by the findings of the BA/Royal Society Conference in 2004 (The Royal Society, 2007). They have been reinforced in numerous international publications (Dudo, 2013; Poliakoff & Webb, 2007; Royal Society, 2006). Science communication was viewed as ‘altruistic’ and not a central part of academic life
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Science Education, Part B
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
