Building Knowledge Together: Citizen Science, Communication, and Trust | 5 - 6 October 2026, Berlin

The Problem: the culture of science in Nigeria is not consolidated. Science communication culture is characterised as fragile. Yet science and technology steer nations out of socioeconomic downturns into a regime of sustainable development (Batta & Iwok, 2019). The participation of citizens in science projects, engagement in technological and innovative initiatives are indicative of the robustness of the science culture – a reflection that experts are collaborating with citizens to deepen science and technology in society. However, the extent to which these occur in Nigeria has scant empiricism because citizen science and science communication researches are nascent. Therefore, the interrogation of these questions now is cogent especially within university communities as centres of scientific inquiries. Research Questions: a. what is the level of citizen participation in science and technology projects in three university communities in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria? b. what factors encourage or discourage the involvement of citizens in science and technology projects in university communities so identified? c. what is the relationship between engagement or non-engagement in science and technology projects, and trust in science within university communities under study? d. what best practices and communication strategies are germane to deepening citizen science practices and trust in science and technology in the selected university communities. Literature: over the years, citizen science research has provided significant insights to aid understanding and improve praxis. Citizen science is a legitimate and epistemologically delineated means of knowledge production and not simply an appendage of data collection (Strasser et al, 2019). The extent of participation of ordinary citizens in science and technology projects, research has shown, is structurally tiered and mainly shallow with a greater majority of citizens operating marginally (Vasiliades et al, 2021). The factors influencing citizen participation in science and technology projects, the literature shows that the psychological drivers that propel citizens to engage with science projects largely predicate participation rates, retention, and quality of contribution (West et al., 2021). Furthermore, research in trust in science indicates that active participation in knowledge production basically changes relationships to science as an authority (Bedessem, et al., 2023). Research on best practices in citizen science shows that projects that deploy participatory design processes involving community members and scientists in raising research questions, methods and execution have the greatest impact (Hacker et al, 2018). Likewise, the research on communication strategies in citizen science shows: a. dialogue, participatory communication models, not the deficit model, b. audience-specific, tailored communication approaches, c. narrative and storytelling methods that humanise science and technology researches; d. community relationship management and sustained social engagement; e. transparent communication of impact and outcomes are the most effective (Golumbic et al, 2020); Scheuffele, 2018; Fischhoff, 2013; Jackson et al, 2024). Theoretical Framework: For Citizen Science to be effective, ethical, and communicative; it is usually planked within the science in society theory, an aspect of science-technology-society studies. This conveys the tenets that citizen science projects must be inclusive, adaptable, sensitive, safe, and reciprocal (Rodriguez, Bandezer, & Navarro-fedreno, 2024). Methodology: to realise the objectives of the study and answer its research questions, a literature review of methodological surveys of citizen participation in science projects in three selected university communities in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria was conducted. The University of Uyo, Akwa Ibom State University, and Topfaith University, Mkpatak were purposively selected for the study to enable comparison of results. Also, a questionnaire survey of a 400 sample of members of the three university communities was undertaken about their participation and trust in science. Furthermore, in-depth interviews of 10 science researchers in the three selected university communities was conducted to: a. ascertain the involvement of citizens in science projects; b. identify the challenges they face; c. find out their perception of citizens in trust science projects within the communities; and, d. evaluate their citizen science communication strategies. Results and Implications: Preliminary results showed a minimal level of citizen involvement/participation in science projects in the university communities as well as weak science communication, deployment of some citizens science protocols, and fair level of trust in science. Based on the findings, recommendations are made to improve citizen science practice, science/communication policy, as well the communication of community science.