IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v50y2023i1p1-14..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Balancing interests between freedom and censorship: Organizational strategies for quality assurance in science communication

Author

Listed:
  • Benedikt Fecher
  • Freia Kuper
  • Birte Fähnrich
  • Hannah Schmid-Petri
  • Thomas Schildhauer
  • Peter Weingart
  • Holger Wormer

Abstract

While science communication is increasingly being discussed as a third mission alongside research and teaching, there is little research on how universities and research organizations deal with issues regarding the quality of science communication. This article examines, from an organizational perspective, which new forms of quality assurance processes scientific organizations in Germany apply when addressing quality risks for science communication such as exaggeration in press releases or in the online communication of individual faculty members. Six focus group discussions were conducted with 22 participants (rectors or presidents of universities, heads of communication, ombudsmen, and high-impact researchers). Based on the results, proposals were developed to extend central as well as decentral organizational structures to assure good scientific communication practice. Their possible implementation was discussed in a workshop with representatives of all abovementioned groups. In conclusion, recommendations for future institutional policy are presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Benedikt Fecher & Freia Kuper & Birte Fähnrich & Hannah Schmid-Petri & Thomas Schildhauer & Peter Weingart & Holger Wormer, 2023. "Balancing interests between freedom and censorship: Organizational strategies for quality assurance in science communication," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 1-14.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:50:y:2023:i:1:p:1-14.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scac043
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:50:y:2023:i:1:p:1-14.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.