Nicole Lee - US grants

For-profit entities in the science, health, and technology sectors have become major players in the public communication of science. Science communication can significantly influence the decisions individuals make related to health behaviors, technology adoption, and policy support. Since the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, U.S. scientists have had the right to patent and commercialize the findings of publicly funded research, which has contributed to the shifting science communication landscape. Despite the influence and prevalence of commercial science communication, little research has focused on its effects. Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing provides a context in which to understand these issues. Science communication from DTC genetic testing companies is particularly important because how consumers learn about genetic science and interact with it can influence their health decisions, their support for science funding or policy, and their perceptions of related technologies.

To achieve the purpose of this research, this project will consist of two related studies. The first study will be a content analysis of emails from ten DTC genetic testing companies and will identify and describe how these companies communicate with their customers about science, the capabilities and limitations of their tests, and the benefits and risks of sharing genetic data. The second study, which will build on the findings from the first, will consist of a national survey of U.S. adults examining the effects of engaging with DTC genetic testing products and receiving communication from DTC genetic testing companies. The survey will inform the impact of DTC genetic testing experiences and communication on science knowledge, perceptions of genetic research, support for science, and other related outcomes.

This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.

Museums are information centers whose mission is to serve and empower society through conserving nature. Museum biological collections provide snapshots of the past to answer questions about the present and future in ways that were not previously imagined. These questions vary widely in both topic and relevancy to the lives of the members of society museums serve. However, the local reach of museums is limited to those who attend in-person to view the small number of displayed specimens, while the remainder of the specimens are housed behind closed doors or even offsite. Funds for the preservation of these collections have been decreasing, putting these collections, their staff, and scientific discoveries at risk. Therefore, determining how museums can use online digital media to expand their reach and how those communication strategies impact perceptions is essential to understand how these largely publicly funded institutions can safeguard their future.<br/><br/>This research will use three related studies to understand and develop evidence-based communication practices for improving public perception of museum biological collections and their associated research. First, a content analysis of the posts of prominent museums on multiple social media platforms will be used to examine how museums use social media to communicate their role in research that benefits society. Second, a survey of U.S. adults will be conducted to assess whether scientists-as-communicators are more or less effective than third-party communicators when presenting research summaries in video format and whether that effectiveness is consistent across research topics that vary in relevancy to an audience’s daily life. And third, a survey of U.S. adults will be conducted to assess whether repeated exposure to museum collection-based research summaries in video format increases support for collection infrastructure funding and whether that support is moderated by whether the scientist themself is the communicator.<br/><br/>This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.