🔭 La mayoría de los participantes sugirieron que no existe una crisis general de confianza en la ciencia; sin embargo, se identificaron desafíos crecientes y complejos relacionados con la confianza entre la ciencia y la sociedad. Las prácticas de investigación cuestionables o perjudiciales, la comunicación irresponsable de la ciencia, los "disruptores" y la influencia de intereses privados y políticos son algunos de los principales factores que contribuyen a estos desafíos. 📢 Además, aunque los participantes estaban relativamente divididos en cuanto a los efectos de la participación pública en la ciencia, coincidieron en que el fomento de una cultura de participación requiere una movilización de todos los actores de la "cadena de mediación": los actores no institucionales de la comunicación científica ya están involucrados, pero otros actores, especialmente los institucionales, deberían desempeñar un papel más activo en el apoyo al desarrollo de proyectos participativos por parte de la comunidad científica. 🏛 Por último, en lo que respecta al papel de las instituciones en la promoción de la integridad social y la integración social, la idea de que cada organización científica debe ser capaz de identificar sistemáticamente los imperativos morales contradictorios a los que somete a su personal parece ser una tarea esencial. Pero es importante subrayar que estas acciones institucionales seguirán siendo ineficaces si no se coordinan tanto a nivel nacional como europeo.
🔬 The POIESIS Focus Groups, a major survey that took place in the 7 Consortium countries (Denmark, UK, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain and Greece) with the participation of dozens of research and science communication experts has been completed. The discussions were extremely interesting in each of the 21 Focus Groups held, with the influence of the wider social context of each country evident in most of them and led to some very interesting findings. 🔭 Most of the participants suggested that there is no general crisis in trust in science; however, increasing, and complex challenges related to trust between science and society were identified. Questionable or detrimental research practices, irresponsible science communication, “disruptors”, and the influence of private and political interests are some of the main factors contributing to these challenges. 📢 Additionally, while participants were relatively divided on the effects of public engagement in science, they agreed that fostering a culture of participation requires a mobilisation of all actors in the ‘chain of mediation’: non-institutional actors in science communication are already involved, but other actors, especially institutional ones, should play a more active role in supporting the development of participatory projects by the scientific community. 🏛 Finally, regarding the role of institutions in promoting social integrity and social integration, the idea that each scientific organization should be able to systematically identify the conflicting moral imperatives to which it subjects its staff seems to be an essential task. But it is important to stress that these institutional actions will remain ineffective if they are not coordinated at both national and European levels. 📚 You can read more about our Focus Groups by reading the Focus Group Findings: Exploring Institutional Roles in Fostering Public Trust in Science (D3.2) document on our website (https://lnkd.in/e73ziz8B)