@article{oai:nagoya.repo.nii.ac.jp:00029526, author = {東岡, 達也 and TOOKA, Tatsuya}, issue = {1}, journal = {名古屋大学大学院教育発達科学研究科紀要. 教育科学}, month = {Oct}, note = {Using interviews with science communicators (SCers) at university, this research clarifies the role of science communication (SC) and the characteristics that distinguish them from their public relations counterparts. The results of the survey can be summarized as such: First, SC-related activities at university are organized into 4 categories: 1) working with public relations via publications, web pages, and social networking services, 2) communicating with media, medical patients, citizens, and companies, 3) organizing events such as science cafés and symposiums, and 4) educating people about SC. Observing the content of SC vis-à-vis the public relations services provided by universities, no large differences are detected. The result of our interviews, however, indicates that the SCers perceive public relations and SC differently. Foremost, they overwhelmingly see public relations as advertisement, promoting an organization and its mission in a positive light. This role can be seen as the embodiment of a deficit model of communication; one that does not disclose the mission fully. The SCers interviewed interpret their role in relation to public relations in both a broad and a concrete sense. In general they envision SC to include public relations; but when describing it concretely, they characterize SC as an activity that, contrary to public relations, conducts two-way communication between the university and society. This research found that SCers, contrary to their own perceptions, do not conduct SC in a two-way manner. Also, the degree of organization of SC at a university, and that university's perception of SC, are factors that determine the roles of SCers. The lack of resources for SC at universities, the lack of a system for evaluating SCers, and the low level of continuity of the SCers activities, are factors that contribute to the lack of autonomy of SCers. Finally, this research suggests that persons in charge of SC at a university expect SCers to conduct SC in a deficit model-like manner; the fact that SC performance is evaluated by research paper output rather than by SC activities may represent factors that obstruct successful two-way SC.}, pages = {85--97}, title = {大学におけるサイエンスコミュニケーションの役割 : インタビュー調査に基づくサイエンスコミュニケーターの役割認識に焦点をあてて}, volume = {66}, year = {2019} }