Science Communication vs Scientific Communication: An Archaeological Perspective

Have you also ever noticed that "science communication" and "scientific communication" are in fact two distinct terms with different meanings? Their abbreviations—SciCom for science communication and SciComm for scientific communication—are nearly identical, which, in my experience, makes it quite easy to confuse them. As an archaeologist who shares illustrations and insights into archaeological research mainly on Instagram, I've encountered these terms and, perhaps, even used them interchangeably without realizing their distinct contexts. This realization led me to delve deeper into understanding and clarifying these concepts.

In this post, I'll explore and unravel these terms and the ideas behind them, drawing on examples from archaeology to illustrate the unique roles they play in how we discover, share, and communicate the intricacies of science.

Exploring Science Communication (SciCom)

Science Communication or SciCom, as defined by Burns, O'Connor, and Stocklmayer, is a dynamic and evolving field that has gained significant traction over the past two decades. It involves using specific skills, media, activities, and dialogue to elicit various personal responses to science. These responses can be summarized using the AEIOU vowel analogy: Awareness, Enjoyment, Interest, Opinion-forming, and Understanding (Burns et al. 2003). This definition underscores the multifaceted nature of SciCom, which goes beyond merely disseminating information to actively engaging individuals in science through a variety of channels like newspaper articles, tv documentaries etc. So, SciCom is all about making science understandable and exciting for everyone, not just scientists. Think of it as translating "science speak" into everyday language.

When I share an illustration of an ancient artifact or archaeological aspect on Instagram, my goal aligns with this definition: to create awareness about the artifact or aspect, generate interest in its background as well as interpretation, and possibly influence opinions or understanding about the period it belongs to.

A method of SciCom that is quite useful in archaeology is storytelling. Storytelling, as Smith, Finkler, and Aitken (2023) explain, is a powerful tool for deconstructing complex ideas and presenting them as relatable, memorable narratives. This approach is particularly effective in science communication because it can influence emotions and transport audiences to different scenarios. These narratives can not only be happening in a written form but also in the form of illustrations, which could be life like scenes, comics, or graphic novels.

Understanding Scientific Communication (SciComm)

While science communication aims to engage and educate the general public, scientific communication, or SciComm, serves a different purpose. It's the languages and processes scientists and researchers use to communicate with each other. This includes the sharing of research findings, the discussion of methodologies, and the critique and support of peers' work via scientific articles or conference presentations. The focus here is on accuracy, detail, and advancing collective knowledge within the scientific community.

SciComm is also crucial in archaeology for several reasons. First, it ensures that new discoveries and interpretations are rigorously examined and validated by other experts in the field. For example, when an archaeologist publishes a paper on a new finding in a peer-reviewed journal, they provide detailed evidence, discuss methodologies, and place their findings within the context of existing research. Second, SciComm fosters collaboration and innovation. By sharing detailed findings and methodologies, archaeologists can build upon each other's work, leading to new insights and advancements in the field. It's a continuous dialogue, where each discovery adds a piece to the larger puzzle of human history. This collaborative nature of SciComm is especially important in fostering an interdisciplinary approaches—combining methods from fields like geophysics, geology, geography, informatics and others—and understanding an aspect from different perspectives. Finally, SciComm plays a key role in maintaining the integrity and credibility of the field. It involves strict standards for evidence and argumentation, ensuring that conclusions are based on solid research and sound reasoning.

Concluding Thoughts: The Synergy of SciCom and SciComm

Understanding the difference between science communication (SciCom) and scientific communication (SciComm) is key for anyone involved in science, not just in archaeology. Both play vital roles, but in different ways. SciCom is about sharing science with everyone. It's about translating complex science into a language that all can understand and enjoy. Whether it’s a blog post, a social media update, or a documentary, the goal is to make science interesting and accessible to the general public. It’s about sparking curiosity and understanding in people who might not be scientists themselves.

SciComm, on the other hand, is more about how scientists talk to each other. This is where researchers share their findings, using technical language and focusing on accuracy. It’s important by verifying new discoveries and building on existing knowledge. In science, including archaeology, this means publishing papers, attending conferences, and having discussions that might be too detailed for a general audience but are essential for scientific progress.

Together, SciCom and SciComm create a balance. SciCom opens the doors of science to the world, making it interesting and relatable. SciComm keeps the science accurate and moving forward. They both need each other – without SciCom, science could become isolated and misunderstood; without SciComm, it might lose its rigor and direction.

In conclusion, while my journey as a German-native speaker sharing archaeological insights in English might have its challenges, it also mirrors the essence of SciCom and SciComm: making complex ideas understandable and sharing them with a wider audience. It's a reminder that at the heart of science and archaeology lies the universal desire to explore, discover, and connect with the world around us, transcending language barriers and cultural differences.

References

[^ref]

• Burns, T.W., O'Connor, D.J. & Stocklmayer, S.M. (2003). Science communication: a contemporary definition. Public Understanding of Science 12(2), 183-202.
• Smith, M., Finkler, W. & Aitken, R. (2012). Connecting people with science: A proof-of-concept study to evaluate action-based storytelling for science communication. Sustainability 15.15, 11655.