Hello,
my name is Eduardo Nevarez and I'd like to present this research titled
''Disseminating research news in HCI: Perceived hazards, how to's, and
opportunities for Innovation."
I worked in collaboration with Estelle Smith from GroupLens research at the
University of Minnesota and Haiyi Zhu from the HCI Institute
at Carnegie Mellon University.
Three main takeaways that I like for you all to recognize by the end of this talk
is that studying issues related to science communication is important to HCI
or reasons of disseminating the work of HCI to General audiences.
The second one is a miscommunication can arise through social thinking mediating
ration, which is the impetus of This research.
And how we can be strategic in the approach
mm actions to Foster better science communication.
I'd like to briefly discuss what
transmutation research is all about and then move on to
how it relates to science
HCI research.
classically
science communication
has had a history of focus on scientific literacy
and it came the public to educational programs and reporting of science
the flock to this approach has been its inability to recognize that presenting
more information about science to audience does not increase the
understanding of it
and blaming this to
a lack of understanding on low science literacy
proves only to win the gap between the public and science
which is Only known as the deficit model
over one shift
to this model
has asked researchers to reconsider the strategies that are being implemented to
increase your understanding
and instead focus on engagement.
The rationale to this is that scientists and Science in general are an
institution that carries a lot of trust
there for opening the doors
to labs and engaging with Publix Elijah's can increases understand.
One thing to know however, is that in those
that new approach?
There's new technologies that may impact the way that information is disseminated
to the public
which I will be
discussing
in how the changing media environment has affected any being impacted by
the technological Landscapes
one has been that meteorites more stories at a faster rate.
So they don't go to the rigorous peer review or
editing that is required
or F that they used to go to
second is that there is a decline of train science journalist, because a lot
of media organizations cannot fund a specialized journalist.
And there's been also lots of cuts in media staff which in itself can be
negatively impacted in the kinds of stories that
is disseminated to the public.
And also there is
a lack of academic incentive for public engagement among researchers
and scientists because
tenure
only allows it's only Allah
achieved through Publications and research
this ship to public engagement
is loaded by Bubala in 2009 and basically states that building relationship
and trust with society and public answers
is better than just trying to persuade them all.
What is the
best science that they should just believe
and to activate incorporate lay input into decision-making or research?
Which in itself can cause everyone to be researchers
in human computer interaction?
There's a lot of interest in science communication
the most obvious one is the need for a chair scientist to share the resources
to public audiences
through the go and technological advancements are shaping the future of
society and sharing that information with other is of essence as everyday
activities like Transportation
Banking and social networks mediate the interaction between people and Technology.
The other is a fact that science research falls in the scope of socio technical
system.
The move to online news incorporates new hardware and software with unknown
teachers on how artists has received needs
as well as the human and in many aspects
embedded in the social technical interaction of receiving those things
research in HCI are in an advantageous position to understand the social
structures and roles of individuals interacting with that Hardware as well
as the software
which important the design of systems that involve.
people and Technology
Some previous research or Pi research
has focused on the production
production related tools for single stakeholder groups.
Like for example journalist Gathering info
journalist generating headlines
and finding real people to come
but this
lack of focus on science communication can create very specific policies on how
the determination of science information
is conducted
which is why we use the media production pipeline
in which we contrasted to the classical science Communications approach
and focus on size science seems to support product of social technically
media.
Interactions
and we recognize how we can
essentially change those Uplands.
So the media production program involves
research lab
and
research Advocates which are known as public information officers who write
press releases who are then
sent to the new services
that I could be
a different
press releases and then send them over to the new songs
which are composed of Social media organizations
and then from there
it goes into the general public.
However,
this traditional model the media production department has changed due to
the new affordances of Web 2.0
that has shifted the Embargo system to all being able to disseminate their work
online
and having
active
participation or
what gets picked.
But the mpps are poem.
That's there's no safeguards built in to protect the information Integrity
the is
incorrect and damaging information can be disseminated badly
and not folk and wanting to notice that miscommunication is not misinformation
as there's no ill intent,
which is why I want to emphasize that although there is
a lot of
overlap between misinformation and disinformation.
Ation,
miscommunication can arise as a function of social type of interaction
and this is a different angle where it's convention in this class and the current
mission for dynamic that we experience of where misinformation scours the web
instead.
The main focus of this paper is the interaction between scientists and media
professionals and the risk of miscommunication that can be
of that interaction,
which is why we
Define miscommunication as being the process Employment public audiences
through inaccurate or misleading scientific information that is
interpreted and presented by media organizations and journalists who write
about science
because miscommunication can be broadly construed
as part of both disinformation and misinformation
this paper tries to disassociate miscommunication after delivered an act
of spreading misinformation either by Propaganda or political agendas
and instead focuses on the passes of the media production pipeline of informing
public audiences to Reno.
Create more missing scientific information.
do this we examine the social technical interaction using the media production
pipeline that involves Community stakeholders with different goals and
roles the use of a variety of Technologies to communicate science
develop
some examples for
are available online
the
Current technology is being used to track
the virus
and people who have the virus in who they come in contact with but also the
opportunities of new HCI research to be disseminated to the public in which a
lot of services Health Services have been moved online.
Which is why are we sir questions
are how does miscommunication of HCI research occurred through specific media
production pipeline mechanism.
And then what strategies can resources used to Foster Foster effective mass
communication of the workpiece in the NPP.
To do that too is we interview 12 participants name of Faculty to a grad
students and one work as an industry professional
be conducted semi-structured interviews in which the participants general
describe their experiences with media professionals
as well as provide specific examples.
And we ask them about the challenges tools and strategies that they like to
know about interactions
and future interactions.
We need a professional.
To analyze the data we use a grounded Theory approach in which we transcribe
the data.
We open coded the transcript we
engaging immersive group meetings where we analyze and then cluster
using Affinity maps
and then we developed a code book in sandwich.
We recorded that
to develop shorter things
essentially our findings were top miscommunication types
and for Origins and then we develop 13th tribe.
Is in the paper,
but I will only focus on the interview since that is the main source of which a
lot of miscommunication can analyze and that's where a lot of researchers have a
lot more control in how to mediate that interaction.
However, I will note
that different miscommunication types
right now.
For example,
the first origin is press releases in which
we identify
three misinformation types.
One is being the fabrication of information.
The second one is cherry picking of information from studies that or ideas
from studies
and the motivation Of Studies by the researcher that are portrayed as we solve
the second is in abuse, which I will discuss in detail.
Which
in itself has two misinformation types one is the free constructed narrative
and the other one is the omission of scientific detail.
The third is something that a lot of researchers have no control over and
that is the median sentence
a lot of media have political agendas and and
propaganda can be disseminated
to the organization.
They're enact.
fictionalization of ideas of scientific
research
they
also can
disseminate inaccurate claims as well as write
their articles tones are
very negatively impacted
back in the research
and they sometimes
the
do misattribute the research to other people
and then the fourth origin is Web 2.0 four letters in which
an internet thing is for sure
can arise
as well as we rapidly publishing of inquiry.
Nation
through the affordances of Web 2.0
So interviews, they need to use we found that there are
two misinformation one is that we construct a narrative where
journalists or media professionals interview
researchers
in which they themselves have a quick constructed narrative and they
try to get the quotes that already confirm their bias.
The second one is the omission of scientific detail in which
a lot of researchers
don't expect that the scientific process of the research
will be
described in
the in the article,
but
that itself could misconstrue the
framing of the research
that
researchers or scientists conducted if the journal is does not understand the
scientific process
and some of the strategies that we
develop from interview is
make sure that you identify the incentive and align it with the media professional
journalists
deliver a prepared bottom line to the journalist when
you practiced Malaysian responses ahead of time
to be able to disseminate that information clearly
and Foster an attitude of collaboration with a journalist.
So as you can see, there are
many more
misinformation that we identify and name or strategies that can be used to
work through those Miss
miscommunication.
However,
one of the things that I like to
talk back before the end of this talk is that you know,
there is a lot of
interest in
HCI.
Science communication
and then miscommunication
can arrive through the social Technical Systems
as well as the Strategic and the best approaches to communicate science
in order for us to be able to
simulate our work
clearly to public answers
into research.
We hope that we can
further explore the interaction between
all the different stakeholders and the to no technological Landscapes that are
are currently
affecting the
way that Miss
misinformation travels through online settings.
Thank you for your time.
There's my email and my contact information you like to reach out
so much for your time.