Communicating Science: Insights from Indonesian Higher Education Institutions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30595/pssh.v25i.1798Keywords:
Science Communication, Higher Education Institutions, ResearchAbstract
This study investigates science communication processes at Universitas Indonesia (UI), Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), and Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB) using a qualitative multiple case study design. Data were collected through in-depth interviews and document analysis, involving 15 key informants. Analysis employed an explanation-building approach in three stages—data collection, case profiling, and conclusion formulation—supported by triangulation through data cross-checking, member checks, and expert consultations to enhance reliability. Findings show that science communication in these universities forms an ecosystem that integrates communicators, messages, media, receivers, and feedback. Institutional actors act as strategic intermediaries, translating scientific knowledge into accessible, actionable forms. Messages align with national and global priorities and are tailored to audience needs. Communication channels combine formal academic outlets with digital media, public events, and community engagement, ensuring broad reach. Receivers—ranging from policymakers and industry to grassroots communities—participate actively, fostering two-way knowledge exchange and collaborative problem-solving. Feedback loops from internal teams and external stakeholders refine both research and its dissemination. Overall, the study highlights a holistic and impact-oriented framework for science communication in Indonesian higher education, bridging academia, industry, policymakers, and the public. This model strengthens national science communication capacity and offers a replicable strategy for linking research with societal needs.
References
Golumbic, Y., Dalyot, K., David, Y. B., & Keller, M. M. 2022. Establishing an everyday scientific reasoning scale to learn how non-scientists reason with science. Public Understanding of Science, 32(1), 40-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221098539
Ubaidillah, A. 2016. Konsep dasar komunikasi untuk kehidupan. AL IBTIDA': Jurnal Program Studi Pendidikan Guru Madrasah Ibtidaiyah, 4(2), 30-54.
Nurhadi, Z. F., & Kurniawan, A. W. 2018. Kajian tentang efektivitas pesan dalam komunikasi
Pohan, D. D., & Fitria, U. S. 2021. Jenis Jenis Komunikasi. Cybernetics: Journal Educational Research and Social Studies, 29-37.
Asriadi, A. 2020. Komunikasi Efektif Dalam Organisasi. RETORIKA: Jurnal Kajian Komunikasi dan Penyiaran Islam, 2(1), 36-50.
Burns, T. W., O'Connor, D. J., & Stocklmayer, S. M. 2003. Science communication: a contemporary definition. Public understanding of science, 12(2), 183-202. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625030122004.
Fischhoff, B., & Scheufele, D. A. 2013. The science of science communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(supplement_3), 14031-14032
Fischhoff, B. 2013. The sciences of science communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(supplement_3), 14033-14039.
Weingart, P., & Joubert, M. 2019. The conflation of motives of science communication—causes, consequences, remedies. Journal of Science Communication, 18(3), Y01.
Coy, S. P., Golden, B. L., Runger, G. C., & Wasil, E. A. 2001. Using experimental design to find effective parameter settings for heuristics. Journal of Heuristics, 7, 77-97.
Weingart, P., & Guenther, L. 2016. Science communication and the issue of trust. Journal of Science communication, 15(05), C01.
Effendy, U. O. (2005). Ilmu, teori dan filsafat komunikasi. PT Citra.
Creswell, John. W. 2019. Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methodes approaches four edition, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Sugiyono. 2016. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: PT Alfabet.
Gómez, S. M. and Luna, Á. B. M. d. 2024. The role of social networks in communication in the scientific research community. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 14(2), 291. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.2361
Shanahan, E. A., Reinhold, A. M., Raile, E. D., Poole, G. C., Ready, R. C., Izurieta, C., … & King, H. (2019). Characters matter: how narratives shape affective responses to risk communication. Plos One, 14(12), e0225968. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225968
Iyengar, S. and Massey, D. S. 2018. Scientific communication in a post-truth society. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(16), 7656-7661. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1805868115
Voci, D. and Karmasin, M. (2021). Sustainability and communication in higher education. 7th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd'21). https://doi.org/10.4995/head21.2021.12831
Diviu-Miñarro, C. and Cortiñas?Rovira, S. 2020. Cómo comunicar una pandemia a la sociedad: la visión de los profesionales. estudio de caso de la covid-19 en el sur de europa. El Profesional De La Información. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.sep.12
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Proceedings Series on Social Sciences & Humanities

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.