Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Qualitative Research

Introduction. Science communication initiatives have grown in the past years, since responsible research needs to involve the general public. However, its evaluation is scarce and remains limited, lacking theoretical bases, clear objectives, methodological rigor, and a lack of systematization. Goals and Methods. In order to develop a framework to evaluate ongoing science communication initiatives of a Portuguese research unit, a systematic literature review was conducted to answer the research question: What are the nature of the studies, target groups, evaluation dimensions, criteria, indicators, and instruments that have been employed for evaluating science communication initiatives? Multidisciplinary databases and ERIC were searched using equivalent strings to extract data from documents over the past decade, following the PRISMA Statement 2020, complemented with additional snowball strategies and web searches. Full text screening involved three reviewers, and the final corpus was established after the quality evaluation of eligible documents. Content analysis was employed to extract information taking into account the research question. Results. The methodological options indicate that the majority of the evaluation studies have summative purposes, involving mainly the target groups (science communication public) rather than the researchers’ voices, hindering the improvement of the initiatives. Many studies currently lack comprehensive information concerning the evaluation process (e.g., evaluation dimensions and criteria). Data collection techniques are poorly designed, since closed questionnaires and scales (e.g., Cantril scale) do not provide explanations of the choices that were made. This may lead to incorrect conclusions and misinform decision-making. Conclusions. This study highlights that a clear definition of science communication initiatives’ aims, objectives and target groups, along with transparent evaluation dimensions, criteria, indicators, and instruments is paramount for ensuring their quality. To enhance science communication, the evaluation process needs to engage science communicators in a learning process grounded in shared purposes and language.