Confidence in Research: German roundtable with Körber-Stiftung

Key points:

• Quality over quantity: Effective science communication must prioritize quality, not just volume

• Pandemic lessons: The pandemic highlighted both the strengths and limits of the scientific system, especially in communication

• Systemic change: Revising evaluation metrics and professionalizing science communication are critical for the future

The bottom line: Building trust in science requires systemic changes, professional communication, and a focus on quality over quantity.

Video transcript

Max Vögler, Vice President Global Strategic Networks - DACH, Elsevier: "The practice of science is currently changing quite rapidly. How is scientific knowledge communicated and disseminated? Where are the boundaries between communication within one's own discipline, with other disciplines within science, and, of course, with parts of the broader public and politics?"

Matthias Mayer, Head Department Science, Körber-Stiftung: "We have invited you all here today because we would like to discuss a study conducted by Economist Impact, commissioned by Elsevier, for which we, as Körber-Stiftung, are the national cooperation partner in Germany. The study asks scientists worldwide in six countries about their perspectives on what constitutes trust in science, the impact of the pandemic on the entire process, and what measures might be suitable to strengthen this trust."

Prof. Dr. Michael Saliba, Institute Director and Professor of Photovoltaics, University of Stuttgart: "Greater trust in science requires communication — not necessarily quantity, but also quality. We are on a very good path in Germany. However, improving quality will be a topic that not only concerns individuals but also institutions. Providing professional support in the background so that communication evolves from a hobby to a profession for individual scientists will be the major task in the coming years and decades."

Prof. Dr. Julia Fischer, Head of Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, University of Göttingen: "During the pandemic, I believe we saw both good and bad things. On the one hand, we saw how incredibly potent the scientific system is. On the other hand, we also saw that we hit limits, for example, in communication. Sometimes, things were communicated too quickly, and information was brought to the public that had not yet been identified as preliminary knowledge.

"To strengthen credibility in science, I believe it is very important to change evaluation systems. It should be less about metrics like the number of papers or the amount of funding and more about reflecting on the fact that thoroughness takes time."

Prof. Dr. Armin Nassehi: "My motivation for participating in the roundtable is closely linked to the fact that the role of scientists in the public sphere, as well as within the scientific system, has changed significantly during the pandemic. I believe that while Germany is well-positioned in terms of science itself, there is still room for improvement, especially when it comes to institutions that organize this transfer, even in an international comparison."