Public engagement : Talking science to laypersons as perceived by postgraduate students in

This study aimed at investigating how and why to engage laypersons with science as perceived by postgraduate students in Jordan. A questionnaire consisted of (24) items, with a 5 point Likert-Scale was used after conducting the validity and reliability of the questionnaire. Findings showed that the respondents showed a positive perception towards engaging laypersons in science as it is vital for their daily life and using technology properly, and the importance of using layperson knowledge in communicating with them. Finally scientists need practice and knowledge to communicate with laypersons.


INTRODUCTION
A long time ago science just used logical thinking; hands-on activities were not allowed.Scientists suffered and faced challenging times in their life, with many jailed and others killed.It was Thomas Bacon (1561Bacon ( -1622) ) who started talking about the practical aspect of science.He used his power during his work in the royal palace of the king at the time, and was very brave to mention hands-on activities.We can say that science was created in the elbows of scientists.Science is defined as knowledge and process.Knowledge is the concepts, facts, laws, principles and theories, while the process is the basic and integrated science process skills, such as observing, predicting, operational definitions etc. Technology is the product of science, so science produces technology, while technology produces new scientific knowledge.
The main aim of science should be to improve, protect, and change the quality of human life, rather than destroy or degrade it.The rapid development of science could cause some threats to human life.Products of science could cause some kind of dangers to the people, but it is possible that some of these problems could have been avoided if lay people had been involved in science and its application.This does not mean that science has improved human life.
Science and its application are of people, by people and for people (Bakuwa, 2014;Limjuco, Jr, Loguinsa, Elmer, & Noval, 2017).There is a need for people to understand science to a certain depth not as scientists themselves.People need to know the ways of selecting choices (Merz, Fischhoff, Mazur, & Fischbeck, 1993).That knowledge might include just estimates of some outcomes (e.g., amount of farm products, health costs).Or, it might require enough knowledge to understand why the experts make those estimates (Achaleke, 2018;De Bruin & Bostrom, 2013;Kongmanus, 2016;Wijetunge, 2016).Knowing that science allow members of the public to follow future improvement in the products of science (Lupia, 2013;Reyna, 2012).
This means that human will be the users of science and producer of science products (technology).A long time ago scientific experts carried out the development of science, such as engineers and technologists, while society was at the receiving end.It is important for everyone, but the general public lacks an understanding of different parts of knowledge such as (concepts, scientific facts, and scientific theories) and the real methodology

Background of the Study
There is a real gap in the understanding of what most scientists do, and how their work relates to the real world, as seen from the perspective of the lay person.It is of great value that scientists should communicate the importance and value of their work to the community.This is an art that needs to be practiced, as scientists need to avoid technical details in order to summarize the body of their research in a very short time.So this study came to elucidate why and how to communicate with laypersons as perceived by postgraduate students in Jordan.

Study Objectives
This study aimed at investigating the following questions: a) Why scientists interact with lay people and the public as perceived by postgraduate students?b) How to communicate with lay people and the public as perceived by postgraduate students?

LITERATURE REVIEW
In 1995Carl Sagan (1934-1996) as cited in (Bakuwa, 2014).Said that "We've arranged a global civilization in which the most crucial elementsprofoundly depend on science and technology.We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology.This is a prescription for disaster.We might get away with it for a while, but sooner or later this combustible mixture of ignorance and power is going to blow up in our faces".
A study by the Pew Research Center (2015) in the USA showed that 87% of 3748 Americanbased scientists connected to the "AAAS" agreed with the statement that "Scientists should take an active role in public debates about the importance of science and technology."Only 13% supported the opposite statement that "Scientists should focus on establishing sound scientific facts and stay out of public policy debates." American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993), Project 2061, and Science for All Americans: "The life enhancing potential of science and technology cannot be realized unless the public, in general comes to understand science, mathematics, and technology and to acquire scientific habits of mind; without a scientifically literate population, the outlook for a better world is not promising, but most Americans are not scientifically literate.The United States should be able to do better."Science is a vital way of representing the nature of science (Irwin & Wynne, 1996).The real argument for understanding science is clearly presented by the United Kingdoms The Royal Society of London (1985) also known as the Bodmer Reportwhich states that: "better public understanding of science can be a major element in promoting national prosperity, in raising the quality of public and private decision-making and in enriching the life of the individual.Improving the public understanding of science is an investment in the future, not a luxury to be indulged in if and when resources allow" (The Royal Society of London, 1985).Analysis and identifying are the few scientific results that people need to know among the scientific knowledge that it would be important to know (Löfstedt, Fischhoff, & Fischhoff, 2002;Von Winterfeldt, 2013).Scientists should start with the most valuable fact and then their benefits (Kahneman & Egan, 2011).Although one can formalize such analyses (Merz et al., 1993;Raiffa, 1968;Von Winterfeldt, 2013), in fact the matters that are important to scientists are also important to the public (Dietz, 2013;Lupia, 2013;Morgan & Henrion, 1990;Raiffa, 1968;Schwartz & Woloshin, 2013;Von Winterfeldt, 2013) RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Sample of the Study
(128) of the postgraduate students at Yarmouk University were selected and answered the questionnaire.

Instruments
A questionnaire was developed, it has 25 statements following 5 points-scale Likert scale, (strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree and strongly disagree), were divided into two main domains (Why to interact with laypersons and how to interact with the laypersons), validity and reliability were conducted using face and content validity, while Cronbach-α for internal consistency was calculated and it was (0.83).

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The results and discussion will be presented according to the sequence of the objectives as follows.

Findings and Discussion of Objective 1
Why scientists should interact with lay people and the public as perceived by postgraduate students?As shown in Table1 the means of postgraduate responses came between 3.86 and 3.42, out of 5 or 73.6%-69.0%and overall percentage of 71.2%.Lay persons should be able to understand the basics of science to make correct decisions.Because science communication seeks to inform decision making, it must listen to the people, to identify the problems that its members faceand, the information they need.While science education begins by hearing to scientists and learning the facts that they wish to present, Klahr (2013).One of the examples of the negative consequences of poor communication between scientists and the laypersons is the issue of climate change (Somerville, 2012).Some studies (Irwin & Wynne, 1996;Wynne, 1989Wynne, , 1991Wynne, , 1996) ) have demonstrated knowledge that complements that of science experts.For example, Wynne (1989), in his study of the relationship between the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF) and Cumbrian sheep farmers after the Chernobyl disaster, found that sheep farmers knew more about the effect of radioactivity on their local environment and sheep farming than scientists.Wynne (1989), Wynne (1991) argues that scientists should not show that they knew everything, and concentrating on the layperson ignorance of science, but that they should learn from the public, culture, and peoples experience.In Jordan as an example some farmers have better knowledge about olive trees than some agriculture engineers, as they deal with these trees as their babies, from sawing them till they grow up.It is clear that it is important to engage laypersons with science as it is important in their daily life, using and trust in technology, and help them to in problem solving.

Findings and Discussion of Objective 2
How to communicate with lay people and the public as perceived by postgraduate students?Table 2 shows that the perception of postgraduate students ranges from 3.45 to 2.95 out of 5, with an average percentage of 64.8%.Communication to a lay person audience is difficult.Scientists should know how to communicate.Meanwhile communication is not an easy process especially with lay people.Some scientific ideas are too complicated so to present and communicate with laypersons becomes too difficult.Real communication skills need extensive training and practice in order to communicate to lay people.It is clear as perceived by postgraduate scientists should use different strategies and ways to communicate with laypersons as follows: a) Simplify (break down the concept): It is a real mistake when scientists breakdown the concept to he layperson and oversimplify it.Also the overestimation of their knowledge can leave them confused and form misconceptions among them.
b) Follow the funnel model: This means to start from a broad concept then go down to narrow concept.This way you will increase the layperson attention to the subject you are going to describe.Finally make the conclusion of your results.c) Storytelling: Storytelling in science is the best way for layperson attention to science subjects.Analogies or metaphors will allow a layperson to engage with your scientific ideas.d) Use friends/family and your neighbors to your advantage: practice your spiel on family members or friends and take their feedback.Give your attention to what they face difficulty to understand and try to tailor your story according to their knowledge.Alternatively, sometimes you need to use text and drawings to explain some scientific ideas.
g) Speaking to the media: Scientists must speak with the media and the key points to remember: Be confident, because you are at the high knowledgeable person.Say no if you are not sure of the scientific concept.Reflect on what you want (or do not want) to be on record days, months or years later, and use that as a filter.
h) Social media can be tricky, but on balance it is good for science communication, as long as you are able to deal with.i) Dont turn your nose up at laypersons who choose to take their knowledge beyond journals or conferences.Current and future challenges: As much as we understand the current and future challenges associated with our changing lives, it is a struggle for many laypeople to see beyond simple scientific concept which affecting their daily life.The science communicator must keep this in mind and find ways to relate the message to the core values of the layperson.

CONCLUSION
Communications are useful if they reach people with the information they need and they can use.This requires collaboration between scientists with subject matter knowledge to communicate and scientists with expertise in communication processesalong with laypersons.Such collaboration affords the sciences the best chance to tell their stories It is clear that there is no doubt about the importance of communicating with laypersons, and communicating with them is not an easy it needs experience and special skills of communication in addition of using different strategies, methods in communicating with them.Companies should play an effective role in social responsibility.Train scientists in how to communicate with laypeople.Universities and colleges should also train scientists on how to communicate with laypeople.

Table 1 :
Means and standard deviations of postgraduate students responses on why to engage laypersons with science

Table 2 :
Means and standard deviations of postgraduate students responses on how to engage laypersons with science *Highest value 5.0