Send message to Author

Short abstract:

Through online focus groups and thematic analysis, this study uncovers scientists' attitudes and use of scientific hype in media, revealing how they present breakthroughs and their concerns about the impact of hype on science, scientists, public engagement and science institutions.

Long abstract:

This study examines scientists' perceptions and use of scientific hype in media, revealing how they present breakthroughs and their concerns about public engagement (Caufield, 2018; Tiffany et al., 2022). Online focus groups (FGs) with 24 Quantum Physicists from an international research center were conducted, representing diverse backgrounds and career stages. Recruitment utilized a snowballing technique. Quantum physics, known for exaggerated claims or hype about quantum computing's potential, served as a rich context (Ezratty, 2022). The results of an inductive thematic analysis (TA) reveal scientists' acknowledgment of their role in generating science hype, consistent with prior research (Sumner et al., 2014). They adeptly tailor communication to diverse audiences, objectives, and visibility strategies within academic and organizational settings. The study reveals various emotions among participants regarding hype in science communication, an underexplored topic. Negative feelings are particularly directed at research institution marketing departments, with frustration, anxiety, and anger expressed about their role in hype generation. Frustration is especially pronounced among those attributing hype to broader organizational issues within academic funding systems. They express dissatisfaction with the pressure to tailor narratives to secure financial support, feeling disheartened about having to market their research, reflecting the profit-driven nature of contemporary science.

Furthermore, the study highlights cognitive dissonance among scientists regarding science communication hype. Despite acknowledging its negative impact on scientific integrity, scientists justify engaging in hype to secure funding or maintain visibility. This dissonance complicates scientists' attitudes as they balance awareness of negative consequences with the pressures and incentives driving their participation in hype.