133133
7
Las rutinas productivas de las Unidades de Cultura
Cientíca y de la Innovación (UCC+i). Condiciones de la
creación de noticias sobre ciencia
The productive routines of the Units
of Scientic Culture and Innovation
(UCC+i). Conditions for the creation of
science news
ARTICLE
Universitat Jaume I Castellón
Degree in Information Sciences from the Complutense University of Madrid, Master’s in New
Trends and Innovation Processes in Communication, and PhD in Communication Sciences from
the Universitat Jaume I (UJI), Castellón. She is currently an associate professor at the UJI. Her
research interests include science journalism and new communication technologies. She has
participated in research projects on science communication, responsible research, and innova-
tion. She has worked as a journalist since 1993 in dierent media and communication oces.
sbarbera@uji.es
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0318-574
RECEIVED: 2023-09-21 / ACCEPTED: 2024-02-23
Susana Barberá Forcadell
OBRA DIGITAL, 25, June 2024, pp. 133 -148, e-ISSN 2014-5039
DOI: https://doi.org/10.25029/od.2024.387.25
Abstract
Most science in Spain is generated in universi-
ties and research centres and it is there where
the Units of Scientic Culture and Innovation
(UCC+i) are created to promote science com-
munication. This article analyses the produc-
tive routines of these agents. We have used a
mixed technique based on a survey of UCC+i
professionals and interviews with experts in
science communication. The conclusions show
that their routines are similar to those of the
communication oces of their institutions and
that they use the same channels to dissemi-
nate their research.
Keywords
Divulgation, Science Communication, Science
journalism, UCC+I, universities
Resumen:
La mayor parte de la ciencia en España se gen-
era en universidades y en centros de investi-
gación y es ahí donde se crean las Unidades
* Esta investigación se enmarca dentro del desarrollo del proyecto UJI-2023-14 nanciado por la Universitat Jaume I
(Plan de Fomento de la Investigación 2023).
134134
The productive routines of the Units of Scientic Culture and Innovation
(UCC+i). Conditions for the creation of science news
de Cultura Cientíca y de la Innovación (UCC+i),
para impulsar la comunicación de la ciencia.
Este artículo analiza las rutinas productivas de
estos agentes. Se ha recurrido a una técnica
mixta basada en una encuesta a profesionales
de las UCC+i y entrevistas a expertos en comu-
nicación cientíca. Las conclusiones permiten
avanzar que sus rutinas se asemejan a las de
los gabinetes de comunicación de sus insti-
tuciones y utilizan los mismos canales para di-
fundir sus investigaciones.
Palabras clave
Comunicación cientíca, divulgación, periodis-
mo cientíco, UCC+i, universidades
1. INTRODUCTION
The communication of science has its origins
in the scientists through their disclosures. It
began as a literary genre in the 17th and 17th
centuries (Calvo, 2002). Previously, there were
great men of history such as Leonardo da Vin-
ci (1452-1519), who considered that the rst
duty of the man of science is communication,
or Gerolamo Cardano (1501-1576), who was
one of the precursors of scientic populariza-
tion with books on mathematics, medicine, and
physics. This task has been professionalized
over the years (Rodríguez, 2013; Calvo, 2002)
with the emergence of science journalism,
which aims to explain in clear language to the
public what are the advances in science so that
they can understand these issues better (Elías,
2008).
In this sense, the main dierence between sci-
entic dissemination and journalism is based
on the fact that dissemination is done by the
sources, in this case, the scientists, and one of
the objectives is to benet their environment.
Meanwhile, journalism discloses and analyzes
whether the experiment is socially worthwhile,
so its objective is to benet society and not the
source. One of the current examples of science
journalism can be seen in the COVID-19 pan-
demic, which has highlighted the evolution that
both the dissemination and communication of
science have been undergoing for some time
(Plaza et al., 2020).
It should be noted that the topics that make up
the scientic news are concentrated on a few
issues. For example, a group of only ten top-
ics in the health eld accumulates more than
half of everything published in ten years. Not all
events have the same probability of becoming
news (Revuelta, 2008). For the author, science
communication is nothing more than the com-
munication of a small part of science, specif-
ic topics explained by a group of information
sources. This theory is reinforced by a study
conducted by Alonso, Serrano, and Moreno
(2018), which shows that researchers who par-
ticipate in communication actions are usually a
minority, even though they recognize that, after
publishing their scientic work in the media, the
research is more recognized among their col-
leagues in Spain and abroad.
Science is mainly generated in universities and
research centers; therefore, both institutions
must carry out this transmission of knowledge
to society. To carry out this management coher-
ently, universities have a department in charge
of managing communication (Simancas and
García, 2017), oering an idea of institutional-
izing communication. In these departments,
public universities, in particular, pursue a dou-
ble objective, as Simancas and García (2022)
state. These are to achieve greater social valu-
ation and accountability. One of the resources
to achieve a projection beyond the university
campus is the creation of expert guides as a
135135
Susana Barberá Forcadell
service for media relations (De Vicente and Si-
erra, 2020).
Added to this, as López-Pérez and Olvera (2019)
point out, is the fact that Spanish science of ex-
cellence still does not consider the Internet a
valuable channel for disseminating its advanc-
es to the public, as evidenced by the diculty
in accessing its websites and social networks.
When they do, they use technical language and
direct their messages to experts.
Therefore, it is necessary to train these experts
to transmit their message in an understand-
able way (De Vicente and Sierra, 2020) and to
prevent possible false information with the ap-
pearance of a scientic nature from being easi-
ly disseminated through social networks. This is
because the consumer of information cannot
easily contrast it, nor do they know which reli-
able sources to turn to (Molina-Cañabate y Ma-
gallón-Rosa, 2020).
This absence of researchers in specic net-
works, such as Twitter, is valued by a somewhat
skeptical current of opinion, which points out
that a certain level of activity distracts from the
actual research activity (Alonso et al., 2020).
Other authors claim that scientists who use
their time to feed public social network proles
with scientic production publish fewer articles
than those exclusively dedicated to research
(Hall, 2014).
To this, it should be added that when an ex-
pert uses language with an aggressive style, the
information they want to convey is perceived
as less credible, and when discussing science
topics, less is learned (König and Jucks, 2019).
On this point, it should be noted that scientists
interact more with other scientists on Twitter
than non-scientists, even though they value
the communication of science to society by ad-
justing their vocabulary with dierent registers
while using more neutral language towards
their peers (Walter et al., 2019).
With all that has been said about this social
network, research focused on Twitter (Denia,
2021) points out that the main functions of this
network are to be a scientic communication
tool to inform the interested public, to consoli-
date and develop communities, to account for
interactions between journalists, experts, and
the public; to increase the impact of scientic
publications; and, nally, to align science and
society or to confront them. Another study (Gil
and Guallar, 2023) points to Twitter as a rele-
vant channel for disseminating science, even
though this social network is sometimes asso-
ciated with hate speech on the part of society.
This increase in the presence of scientists has
led Spanish universities to use this social net-
work to showcase their actions related to in-
novation and knowledge transfer to society
(Carratalá and Menencia, 2019). Along with this
and other social networks, streaming platforms
such as YouTube (Rajas et al., 2022) have been
gaining prominence in recent years, serving as
a loudspeaker to disseminate the work of sci-
entists in a more pleasant and closer way with
audiovisual and multimedia contents.
This space that scientists do not occupy is
sometimes taken by politicians, especially on
the issue of climate change, where they appear
as sources of information without doing much
pedagogy on the subject (Abejón et al., 2020).
In contrast to this theory, a study by San Cor-
nelio et al. (2021) focused on eco-inuencers
on Instagram assures that these new agents
propose a sustainable lifestyle to change soci-
ety while oering solutions to climate change
in favorable terms to reach the most signicant
number of people.
136136
The productive routines of the Units of Scientic Culture and Innovation
(UCC+i). Conditions for the creation of science news
Another channel through which the dissemi-
nation of scientic content is intended is televi-
sion. In this sense, recent research (Carcaboso
et al., 2023) focuses on the ctional series The
Big Bang Theory to show the relationship that
may exist between audiovisual production and
the dissemination of science. The results show
that audiovisual products and television series
can include scientic content and are oppor-
tune media to carry it out. Thus, they have an
educational function, also attributed to the me-
dia.
1.1. THE UCC+I AS AGENTS
FOR THE DISSEMINATION
OF SCIENCE
In 2007, in the context of the Year of Science
in Spain, the Spanish Foundation for Science
and Technology (FECYT) promoted the Net-
work of Scientic Culture and Innovation Units
(FECYT Network). This network aims to set up
organizations that promote interest in science
and scientic culture in society by transmitting
knowledge generated in research centers, uni-
versities, and other science-related institutions.
In addition, they work to promote scientic and
innovative culture in civil society and the pro-
ductive fabric (FECYT, 2021).
For this reason, the relatively recent creation of
these units has meant that only a few studies
focusing on them have yet to be published. De-
spite this, the interest in science communica-
tion favors the research of these unique, spe-
cialized communication units.
Before the creation of the ocially recognized
UCC+i in Spain, Science Communication Oces
(SCO) have worked in Europe and the United
States for more than fty years. However, they
are relatively recent in Spanish-speaking coun-
tries such as Mexico (Frías and Rueda, 2014). As
far as Spain is concerned, the UCC+i has meant
a structure in many universities and centers
that gives them visibility and the possibility of
relating to the general population or groups.
Among these groups are journalists specializing
in science (Moreno, 2022) who, in recent years,
have acquired greater relevance in the media.
They make scientic content understandable
to the public, which fosters interest and also fa-
vors the cultural advancement of society.
Therefore, for some theorists, UCC+i are
unique SCOs since they are ocially recognized
as institutionalized gures at the state level to
fulll a social function (González-Pedraz et al.,
2018). The work of these UCC+i had great social
recognition during the pandemic by Covid-19.
It was in March 2020 when the professionals
of the UCC+i adopted an active attitude as an
informative source and worked more ex ocio
by explaining, through their researchers, the
possible doubts of society at the demand of
the media (Sanz-Hernando and Parejo-Cuéllar,
2021).In addition, it launches innovative initia-
tives through the Internet.
1.2. AREAS OF ACTION
AND PROFESSIONAL
FUNCTIONS OF THE UCC+I
Like any other organization, the UCC+i has spe-
cic objectives for its professionals. Below are
the leading professional functions (Table 1) of
the UCC+i workers and their areas of action,
based on the manual ‘UCC+i: origen y evolución
(2007-2014)’ by FECYT (2015).
137137
Susana Barberá Forcadell
Table 1
Spheres of action and functions of UCC+i employees
Source: Own elaboration based on the
manual ‘UCC+i: origin and evolution (2007-2014).
With the
researchers
Collaborate with researchers from
their universities and research cen-
ters to disseminate their projects and
results.
Advise and train researchers in sci-
ence communication and populariza-
tion of science.
Serve as intermediaries between
university researchers and research
centers that generate research and
journalists.
Increase the participation of scien-
tists as generators of opinion on top-
ics of their competence in the media.
With the
journalists
Maintain a constant relationship with
journalists to increase their interest
in scientic information.
To elaborate scientic information
with quality and clarity.
To give visibility to scientic informa-
tion in the media.
With soci-
ety
Promote scientic culture and inno-
vation to society.
Organize scientic dissemination
and popularization activities, such as
workshops, fairs, guided tours, and
open days.
Research on the social perception of
science.
1.3 OBJECTIVES
The main objective of this research is to know
the productive routines of the UCC+i in Spain.
It is expected to be known from the following
specic objectives:
01. Identify the relationship with the communi-
cations oce and researchers.
02. Determine the demands of the UCC+i to
improve their productivity.
03. Analyze the use of their tools to communi-
cate science.
2. METHODOLOGY
Following the objectives set, the analysis was
carried out using two methodological ap-
proaches. First, a quantitative technique was
used to survey UCC+i professionals to analyze
their work exhaustively. This technique mea-
sures the variables under study objectively and
highly precisely (Lafuente and Marín, 2008).
Specically, data are collected and analyzed on
certain variables that support and reinforce the
in-depth identication of the reality of science
communication generated by the UCC+i of
Spanish universities and research centers.
138138
The productive routines of the Units of Scientic Culture and Innovation
(UCC+i). Conditions for the creation of science news
Thus, the survey is used as a rst sample
among the specic population to be analyzed,
which will advance the research. Data collec-
tion is carried out through a questionnaire to
a sample of the population, where the ano-
nymity of the participants is a priority. The main
phases of this technique include the design of
the sample, construction of the questionnaire,
interviews, coding, eldwork monitoring, data
preparation for analysis, analysis techniques,
and presentation of results.
In the present research, a survey was carried
out to analyze the situation of science commu-
nication in Spanish UCC+i. For this purpose, all
the UCC+i that were part of the Network of the
Spanish Foundation for Science and Technol-
ogy (FECYT), which depends on the Ministry of
Science and Innovation of the Government of
Spain, were taken as a sample. The universe of
the sample is the 96 UCC+i that were registered
in the network in 2019. Under the umbrella of
the Foundation, this network promotes the ex-
change of experiences and the search for syn-
ergies between entities, improving the quality
of the products and services of the UCC+i and
optimizing resources.
Online surveys were conducted among the
persons responsible for the UCC+i to carry out
the study, with the collaboration of the FECYT
as the coordinating entity of the network. Spe-
cically, the questionnaire was sent by e-mail
to the Head of Unit of the Department of Sci-
entic Culture and Innovation of the FECYT,
César López García, so that he could send the
survey to all the UCC+i in the network since he
has a database with all the units. To obtain the
maximum number of responses, these surveys
were carried out through multiple invitations to
all those responsible for the UCC+i. The survey
was developed using the free Google Form ap-
plication, which allows the researcher to pose
multiple-choice and open-ended questions for
respondents to answer using any electronic de-
vice connected to the network.
The questionnaire developed for the units was
sent to 96 UCC+i in December 2019 and Janu-
ary 2020. Fifty-eight completed questionnaires
were collected, representing 60.4% of the total
population of the existing UCC+i in Spain in that
period.
Secondly, a qualitative analysis was carried out
using the semi-structured in-depth interview
technique, which oers the researcher consid-
erable scope for probing the interviewees and
maintaining the basic structure of the interview.
Interviews were conducted with fteen experts
in science communication with outstanding ex-
perience in this eld: ve researchers, ve sci-
ence journalists, and ve UCC+i professionals.
The objective was to investigate the interaction
between these three proles of actors and the
importance they give to UCC+i.
For each of these proles, the journalists be-
long to dierent media: news agencies, news-
papers, radio, television, and the Internet. Re-
searchers work in Spanish public universities.
Finally, UCC+i professionals work in Spanish
public universities and research centers. The
in-depth interviews were carried out in May
and June 2020, each lasting an average of one
hour.
The interviews were conducted in Spain, except
for one in which the interviewee was in Argen-
tina. Of these, twelve were conducted through
the Google Meet platform due to the State
of Alarm caused by the health crisis caused
by COVID-19. Three were carried out using
a questionnaire of closed questions, but with
one of the interviewees, a call was made later
139139
Susana Barberá Forcadell
via Google Meet to collect more answers to the
questionnaire.
The interview questionnaire was elaborated
with dierent questions for the three proles
mentioned above. In this sense, for research-
ers, the questions were divided into four blocks
that addressed knowledge and valuation of UC-
C+i, digital resources, productive routines, and
digitization and visibility. For journalists, there
were four blocks on productive routines, the
importance of UCC+i, communication actions,
and digital tools. Finally, for the UCC+i profes-
sionals, a questionnaire was elaborated with
four blocks on the institution and training, vis-
ibility of UCC+i, digitalization, and productive
routines.
3. RESULTS
The analysis allows us to delve deeper into the
productive routines of the UCC+i professionals.
The results obtained on three questions are
detailed below: relations with the communica-
tion oce and with researchers (3.1), the units’
demands to improve their productivity (3.2),
and the tools they use to communicate science
(3.3).
3.1. RELATIONS WITH THE
COMMUNICATION BUREAU
AND RESEARCHERS
The results of the UCC+i survey show a rel-
atively complete diagnosis of the productive
routines of the units’ employees. Most respon-
dents, 93.1%, agree that their work is coordi-
nated with the institution’s communication of-
ce. In addition, more than half said they share
physical space and even human resources with
the oce, although only some who say they are
in coordination have a location close to the of-
ce. Added to this is the dierence in the num-
ber of hours they dedicate to the unit, as some
of them share this task with other duties in the
communication oce or do not have a full-time
contract; this fact hinders their total dedication
to the UCC+i.
On the other hand, the professionals of the
units consider it essential, and that is why they
do so, to have a xed agenda of researchers
collaborating with their institution (Figure 1),
even though they indicate that they do not al-
ways turn to the same researcher to meet the
demands of the media. Hence, it is essential to
have a constantly expanding agenda. Most of
the professionals surveyed have a xed agenda
of researchers who collaborate with the unit.
These contacts are made, in a high percentage
(81%), through occasional meetings with re-
searchers for specic information, and second-
ly (34.5%) through conferences to encourage
researchers to disseminate their knowledge.
However, there are also those who say that
there are teams of experts in dierent areas
who can be consulted. Of the professionals
surveyed, 1.7% responded that.
The frequency with which they are contacted
varies widely, but as the results show, it is not
very frequent. One-third say that they meet
once a year with the researchers, and oth-
ers meet once a month. In most cases, these
contacts between the communicator and the
researcher are made through personalized
e-mails. However, telephone calls and visits to
the researcher’s oce are also quite common.
This suggests that there is a close relationship
between some communicators and research-
ers, which facilitates the work of the former
when preparing information for the unit.
140140
The productive routines of the Units of Scientic Culture and Innovation
(UCC+i). Conditions for the creation of science news
These agendas are created through training
sessions and periodic meetings to encourage
researchers to be sources of information. In
most cases, these meetings only go up once a
year. Therefore, a lack of close collaboration be-
tween UCC+i and researchers is detected when
scheduling communication. Faced with this lack
of face-to-face meetings, personalized e-mails,
phone calls to researchers, and even visits to
their oces are the most frequently used ways
to contact them. This shows an interest in get-
ting closer and personalizing the relationship.
On the other hand, contacts through events
and general emails are not used very often.
3.2. DEMANDS OF THE UCC+I
TO IMPROVE PRODUCTIVITY
According to the results, the primary demand
is for more personal resources (86.2% of the
cases), followed by the need for more materi-
al resources (58.6%) (Figure 2). The rest of the
responses collected propose, as initiatives to
improve their work, the need for a person ded-
icated to social networks (1.7%), more visibility
(1.7%), stabilization of personnel (1.7%), and an
institutional strategy (1.7%), raising awareness
among the institution’s management team
(1.7%), having funding for events (1.7%), having
the support of the government team (1.7%), re-
searchers having more time (1.7%) and, nally,
incorporating scientic dissemination into So-
cial Responsibility (1.7%).
Regarding the provision of more personnel,
the majority opted for reinforcing the existing
sta (96.1%) as opposed to those who chose
to subcontract external personnel (31.4%). Re-
garding the provision of more material resourc-
es, they arm that this could be obtained with
an increase in the budget for the units (76.9%).
Some say that they have no budget allocated
to them and, therefore, it is dicult for them to
carry out their work.
Figure 1
Management of sources of information
Source: Own elaboration
141141
Susana Barberá Forcadell
Figure 2
Proposal for the improvement of work
Source: Own elaboration
3.3. USE OF TOOLS
FOR SCIENCE
COMMUNICATION
The results obtained from the interviews show
that the productive routines carried out by
the unit professionals are similar to those of
science journalists working in the media since
both share the task of informing. For this rea-
son, both groups see the creation of an agenda
of researchers to whom they can turn as sourc-
es of information as relevant.
“Yes, there are researchers with whom you
have more contact because they are very ac-
tive, and others with whom you have contact
from time to time” (UCC+i professional 1).
The researchers also value this consideration,
even though, in some cases, they express the
idea that the same sources should not always
be used, either because of their availability or
because of a good way of communicating with
the media. They ask that the agenda be open to
the entire institution.
“Ideally, they should have all the researchers of
the entity [...]. I think that one of the missions
of the UCC+i and the communication depart-
ments is to scratch the other researchers so
that, in the end, all of them participate in the
communication” (researcher 4).
Along with the researchers’ agenda, journalists
can turn to the institutions’ websites for infor-
mation. These websites publish pieces pre-
pared by the professionals of these structures,
who consider them their priority channels for
disseminating their information.
“We use the institutional website as the rst
container to bring together the work carried
out by the UCC+i. In addition to more tradition-
al channels such as sending notes to the media
and sharing content on YouTube, Instagram,
and Facebook to reach younger generations”
(professional UCC+i 1).
However, these websites are not the primary
channels for journalists to seek information
because they consider them containers where
they only publish what is favorable for the insti-
tution, just as press oces do.
“The communication oces or the UCC+i, if
they want more presence in the media, would
have to be more proactive” (journalist 1).
On the other hand, researchers who say they
visit the media point out their curiosity to learn
about the work being done by colleagues from
their own or other institutions.
142142
The productive routines of the Units of Scientic Culture and Innovation
(UCC+i). Conditions for the creation of science news
“Because I follow the scientic news and in case
there is something in my eld that might inter-
est me too, to see ideas and because it is my
eld of interest” (researcher 5).
In this sense, one of the actions most frequent-
ly carried out by the professionals of these
units continues to be the preparation of press
releases, a means used to send information to
the conventional media since the early years of
the appearance of the communication cabinets
(Simón, 2017). According to the responses ob-
tained, these press releases are published on
the websites mentioned above and sent via
email to the media. These press releases are
generally well regarded by journalists and re-
searchers since they facilitate the work of both,
which gives the most accurate information
possible on the research being carried out. In
many cases, this translates to the complicated
language of scientic work.
“Press releases are important because they re-
port something that was a paper no one under-
stands” (researcher 1).
Despite this, journalists recognize that they do
not use them as they come to them but as fu-
ture contacts or as a preliminary to expand the
information later. Thus, they avoid having the
same information as the rest of the media.
“On the assumption that we do not pay atten-
tion to the press release, I am interested in
receiving the press release because they are
those little grains of sand that someday may be
useful to me” (journalist 2).
These investigations disseminated through
press releases are carried out once the re-
sults have been obtained and usually when the
study has already been published in a scientic
journal. In most cases, researchers do not favor
publishing their work in the media when it has
not yet been fully completed. However, this has
been changing in recent years due to the ob-
ligation of some projects to publish what they
are researching.
“I think they can come out in many phases be-
cause they do not only have to be results, that
is, many times they are results, and I think that
is ne, but sometimes it is very relevant to bring
out the research you want to do because that
gives it visibility [...] science is a continuous
thing, and it is a process and it is not only the
results” (researcher 1).
On the other hand, journalists see the need
for the studies to be carried out to be covered
by the media from the beginning because they
consider that there are interesting topics from
the start of the research process. In the mid-
dle are the professionals who are indebted to
their institution’s researchers and who cannot
disseminate their information without the cor-
responding permission.
“I am hypercritical of post-publication com-
munication in a ‘here you have it all and it has
done’ kind of way. There is no history, and there
is nothing. To me, one of the things I am liking
about Covid, despite its imperfections, is that
you are seeing science in process, as it is being
done” (journalist 1).
143143
Susana Barberá Forcadell
The reason explained above leads, on many oc-
casions, to journalists not going to the UCC+i
to request information because they know how
they work. Many times, they encounter an in-
surmountable wall that will not be able to meet
their requests. For this reason, they turn to re-
searchers, if they have a relationship with them,
to ask for information about their work.
“We skip as many intermediate steps as we
can by system. [...] All those channels that are
very good when you do not know how to reach
someone when you know how to get there, we
try to avoid them to go directly to the source, to
speed things up” (journalist 2).
In addition, the work carried out in these units
is coordinated with the corresponding commu-
nications oce, in most cases, to organize all
the information coming out of the institution
and give these structures greater visibility.
“You cannot have a UCC+i on one side and a
communication oce on the other because, in
the end, what we are doing is showing society
what we do, either by researching or dissemi-
nating [...] In the end, the objective of both the
UCC+i and the communication oce is the im-
age of the university” (UCC+i professional 2).
All of the above leads to the conclusion that the
unit professionals use the same communica-
tive tools used by the press oces and coordi-
nate with them to achieve greater visibility.
However, despite this, it seems that their ef-
forts do not bear all the desired fruits, as they
do not get journalists, their primary recipients
of the media, to use all the channels they make
available to them, such as emails, websites,
telephone calls, and social networks, to name
a few. The fact of ‘skipping’ the UCC+i profes-
sional to go directly to the researchers is also
present in these structures, as it happens in the
press oces since the way of working is very
similar. This, perhaps, should be reconsidered.
4. DISCUSSION AND
CONCLUSIONS
The data from this study show that the work
carried out by the UCC+i professionals and that
of the communication oces is similar. Both
work with information to disseminate to the
media, and the press release is one of the main
tools they use. Although not all UCC+i profes-
sionals are trained as journalists, their main ob-
jective is to publicize the research carried out in
their institution.
In line with the ndings of previous studies (Ni-
eto and Vendrell, 2001; De Semir, 2013; Bustos,
2012), the information produced in specialized
press oces is still too institutional despite
having the label of science. Authors such as
Simancas and García (2022) state that univer-
sities have their own department to manage
communication, and this makes the informa-
tion more institutional since their objectives are
to achieve greater social appreciation while at
the same time being accountable to society for
their work.
Although well received by specialized journal-
ists, this information in press release format
144144
The productive routines of the Units of Scientic Culture and Innovation
(UCC+i). Conditions for the creation of science news
is not published as it arrives. They argue that,
based on them, they seek to expand this in-
formation in order to dierentiate themselves
from the information of the rest of the general
journalists, who, they assure, will limit them-
selves to a “copy and paste” of the press re-
lease.
The priority channel through which they dis-
seminate information to the media is email,
and subsequently, they are published on the
unit’s website. This result coincides, in part, with
previous studies by López-Pérez and Olvera
(2019), who claim that the science of excellence
did not consider the Internet to be a valuable
channel for disseminating their advances to
society because, although the results of this re-
search show an interest in communicating the
ndings of their universities and centers on the
Internet, they rst use the internal channels of
their institutions to do so.
Our ndings allow us to make novel contribu-
tions to the forms used to communicate sci-
ence in the UCC+i. The most outstanding one is
that the specialization of the unit professionals
provides them with a greater number of tools
that enable more uid communication with the
media and, as a result, with society as the nal
recipient.
One of the tools created by half of the profes-
sionals of the units surveyed is the xed agen-
das of researchers in their institutions, which
they manage within each UCC+i. This allows
them to have a direct and continuous rela-
tionship with the generators of knowledge in
their institutions and makes it easier for them
to address them when they receive requests
for information from the media. In most cases,
the methods used to create the agendas are
specic days, by telephone and email, although
some still opt to visit the researcher’s oce. Al-
though this xed agenda would favor the work
of the units, a part (30%) still chooses to look
for a dierent researcher each time, depending
on the topic requested by a journalist from a
media outlet.
This is due, in many cases, to the diculty of
these professionals in the units to create a
list of researchers who are available when re-
quired by the media, but also because they
believe that a xed agenda, even if it can be
updated, does not reect all the researchers in
their institution.
Regarding the relationship with the communi-
cation oces of the institutions in which they
perform their functions, the UCC+i teams work
independently of the institutional oce, pre-
paring information and carrying out specialized
activities in science communication. However,
it should be noted that they are coordinated by
the Communication or Research departments.
These two are shown as the most repeated
areas that supervise the UCC+i, although it is
true that not all of them are in them due to the
145145
Susana Barberá Forcadell
relative novelty of these structures. This means
that, in some cases, they belong to dierent
departments or services due to the lack of a
common set of regulations for universities and
research centers.
Their relationship with the various institutions’
departments means that they are not rec-
ognized as micro press oces or press oc-
es specialized in science, as might have been
expected. This is due to the specializations of
each unit since not all cases are a question of
producing information. According to previous
studies, these have dierent functions from the
press oces, and therefore, they perform com-
plementary actions (Parejo et al., 2017).
Now, in line with the ndings of previous re-
search (Bellón, 2018; Nieto and Vendrell, 2001;
González-Pedraz et al., 2018), the units that
elaborate informative pieces involve the re-
search sta to get that knowledge to the me-
dia since the communicator specialized in the
science of the institution, being closer to the
scientist, is the one who knows better his pro-
fessional career and has a greater condence
to request the information than an external
journalist could have. In addition, these units
promote publicity and public relations among
their tasks without losing sight of their prima-
ry objective, which is the social transmission of
the knowledge generated in the institution.
Likewise, the data obtained in the research
show that there are some shortcomings in
these units in order to improve their produc-
tion, which are claimed by the professionals
working in them. Among them, the lack of per-
sonnel (86.2%) and material resources (58.6%)
stand out. Regarding personnel, they are in fa-
vor of reinforcing the sta since, in some cases,
the person in charge of the UCC+i performs
other tasks within the communications oce;
they even see the possibility of hiring external
personnel to perform more functions within
their department. They demand more fund-
ing for material resources to improve technical
equipment and carry out more dissemination
and promotion actions.
The present research is limited to studying the
units from their start-up to the present. Among
the limitations of the study are the number of
responses received from the UCC+i and the
small number of in-depth interviews, which,
nevertheless, have provided insight into the
work carried out in these units. This, added to
the recent work dynamics of these profession-
als on the Internet, will make it possible for fu-
ture studies to investigate the work carried out
in the UCC+i to analyze its impact on science
communication at the national and even inter-
national levels.
146146
The productive routines of the Units of Scientic Culture and Innovation
(UCC+i). Conditions for the creation of science news
REFERENCES
Abejón, P., Carrasco, R., Cabedo, J. y Mera, M. (2020). Los políticos como fuen-
tes de la información sobre cambio climático. Comparativa entre los
digitales El País y ABC. Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 26(4), 1283-
1293. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/esmp.68175
Alonso-Flores, F.-J, Serrano-López, A. y Moreno Castro, C. (2018). La publi-
cación de noticias sobre los resultados de I+D+i. ¿Cómo es percibida
por los investigadores españoles? InMediaciones de la Comunicación.
13(2), 115-139 https://acortar.link/8t8NxM
Alonso-Flores, F.-J., De-Filippo, D., Serrano-López, A.-E., y Moreno-Castro, C.
(2020). Contribución de la comunicación institucional de la investi-
gación a su impacto y visibilidad. Caso de la Universidad Carlos III de
Madrid. Profesional De La Información, 29(6). https://doi.org/10.3145/
epi.2020.nov.33
Bellón, A. (2018). Gabinetes de comunicación del Sistema de Ciencia, Tec-
nología e Innovación: el puente que cruza la I+D+i para llegar a los me-
dios. Communication Papers, 7(13), 237-252. https://doi.org/10.33115/
UDG_BIB/CP.V7I13.21992
Bustos, R. (2012). El Gabinete de prensa ante el nuevo ecosistema infor-
mativo digital. adComunica, Revista de Estrategias, Tendencias e Inno-
vación en Comunicación, 4, 223-227. http://dx.doi.org/10.6035/2174-
0992.2012.4.14
Calvo, M. (2002). El periodismo cientíco, reto de las sociedades del siglo
XXI. Comunicar. Revista Cientíca de Comunicación y Educación, 19, , 15-18
https://acortar.link/6LkyuJ
Carcaboso-García, E., Flores-Jaramillo, S., Gómez-Crisóstomo, R., y Trabade-
la-Robles, J. (2023). Uso y distribución de las alusiones cientícas en las
series de cción. El caso de The Big Bang Theory. Revista Mediterránea
de Comunicación/Mediterranean Journal of Communication, 14(1), 119-
131. https://www.doi.org/10.14198/MEDCOM.23290
Carratalá, A. y Menencia, E. (2019). La internacionalización de las universi-
dades valencianas a través de Twitter. Obra Digital, (17), 35–49. https://
doi.org/10.25029/od.2019.227.17
De Semir, V. (2013). Protagonistas y públicos de la comunicación cientíca.
El cientíco ante los medios de comunicación. Retos y herramientas
para una cooperación fructífera. Cuadernos de la Fundación Dr. Antonio
Esteve, 28, 1-8.
De Vicente, A. M., y Sierra, J. (2020). La guía de expertos como herramienta
de comunicación y divulgación cientíca: gestión y diseño en la Uni-
versidad de Navarra. Fonseca, Journal of Communication, (20), 143–159.
https://bit.ly/38pvJIi
147147
Susana Barberá Forcadell
Denia, E. (2021). Twitter como objeto de investigación en comunicación de
la ciencia. Revista Mediterránea de Comunicación/Mediterranean Journal
of Communication, 12(1), 289-301. https://www.doi.org/10.14198/MED-
COM000006
Elías, C. (2008): Fundamentos del Periodismo cientíco y divulgación mediática.
Alianza Editorial SL.
FECYT (2021). Libro blanco de las Unidades de Cultura Cientíca y de la In-
novación, Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología. https://
acortar.link/xtovTO
FECYT (2015). UCC+i: origen y evolución (2007-2014). Fundación Española
para la Ciencia y la Tecnología. https://acortar.link/VQSj9u
Frías, G. y Rueda A. (2014). Las ocinas de comunicación de la ciencia en la
UNAM. Revista Digital Universitaria, 15 (3). https://bit.ly/3PNafpm
Gil, L. y Guallar, J. (2023). Cientícos en redes sociales. Divulgación y curación
de contenidos en twitter: taxonomía y casos. index.comunicación, 13(1),
55-77. https://doi.org/10.33732/ixc/13/01Cienti
González-Pedraz, C., Pérez-Rodríguez, A. V., Campos-Domínguez, E. y Quin-
tanilla, M. A. (2018). Estudio de caso sobre las Unidades de Cultura
Cientíca (UCC+i) españolas en la prensa digital. Doxa Comunicación,
26, 169-189. https://bit.ly/3MTysbI
Hall, N. (2014). The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media
prole for scientists. Genome Biology, 15, 424. https://doi.org/10.1186/
s13059-014-0424-0
König, L., y Jucks, R. (2019). Hot topics in science communication: Aggres-
sive language decreases trustworthiness and credibility in scientic
debates. Public Understanding of Science, 28(4), 401-416. http://doi.org/
dw9j
Lafuente, C., y Marín, A. (2008). Metodologías de la investigación en las ciencias
sociales: Fases, fuentes y selección de técnicas. Revista Escuela De Admin-
istración De Negocios, (64), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.21158/01208160.
n64.2008.450
López-Pérez, L., y Olvera-Lobo, M. D. (2019). Participación digital del público
en la ciencia de excelencia española: análisis de los proyectos nancia-
dos por el European Research Council. El profesional de la información,
28(1).https://doi.org//10.3145/epi.2019.ene.06
Molina-Cañabate, J.P. y Magallón-Rosa, R. (2020). Desinformación y periodis-
mo cientíco. El caso de Maldita Ciencia. Revista Mediterránea de Comu-
nicación/Mediterranean Journal of Communication, 11(2), 11-21. https://
www.doi.org/10.14198/MEDCOM2020.11.2.4
Moreno, M. A. (2022). Los exoplanetas y su visibilidad creciente como piezas
informativas en los periódicos ABC y El Mundo (1990-2018). Doxa Co-
municación, 34, 79-101. https://doi.org/10.31921/doxacom.n34a851
148148
The productive routines of the Units of Scientic Culture and Innovation
(UCC+i). Conditions for the creation of science news
Nieto, J., y Vendrell, M. (2001). Els gabinets de prensa com a mediadors entre
els cientícs i els mitjans. En: C. Junyent (ed.). Comunicar ciencia. Treballs
de la SCB, 51, 159-165.
Parejo, M., Martin, D., y Vivas, A. (2017). La divulgación cientíca. Estructuras y
prácticas en las universidades. Gedisa Editorial.
Plaza, J. A, Primo, E., Bojo, C., y Molina, P. (19 de abril de 2020) Informe del
grupo de análisis cientíco sobre coronavirus del Instituto de Salud
Carlos III. Difusión y Comunicación de la Ciencia. Ministerio de Ciencia e
Innovación del Gobierno de España. https://bit.ly/2VN3iKe
Rajas, M., Alves, P. y Muñiz, C. (2022). Creación y difusión de contenidos au-
diovisuales y multimedia: la transformación educativa y cientíca en
marcha. index.comunicación, 12(2), 13-27. https://doi.org/10.33732/ix-
c/12/02Creaci
Revuelta, G. (2008). El periodisme cientíc com a sinècdoque: la part pel tot.
Trípodos, 22, 79-86
Rodríguez, C. (2013). Periodismo Cientíco y de Salud. En: Cebrián Enrique,
Bernardino y Mirón, Luis María (coord.) Áreas del Periodismo. Comuni-
cación Social, 202-230.
San Cornelio, G., Ardèvol, E., y Martorell, S. (2021). Estilo de vida, activismo y
consumo en inuencers medioambientales en Instagram. Obra Digital,
(21), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.25029/od.2021.326.21
Sanz-Hernando, C. y Parejo-Cuéllar, M. (2021). Disrupciones en el modelo
comunicativo de las fuentes expertas: impacto del COVID-19 en las
unidades de cultura cientíca e innovación. Revista de Comunicación de
la SEECI, 54, 163-186. https://acortar.link/t5YYJe
Simancas-González, E., y García-López, M. (2022). La comunicación de las
universidades públicas españolas: situación actual y nuevos desafíos.
Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 28(1), 621-637. https://dx.doi.
org/10.5209/esmp.76011
Simancas-González, E., y García-López, M. (2017). Gestión de la comuni-
cación en las universidades públicas españolas. El profesional de la in-
formación, 26(4), 735-744. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2017.jul.17
Simón, J.E. (2017). Uso de las Redes Sociales por las universidades públicas
andaluzas. Análisis de contenido de la cuenta ocial de Twitter. Estudios
sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 23(1), 631-645. https://doi.org/10.5209/
ESMP.55618
Walter, S.; Lörcher, I., and Brüggemann, M. (2019). Scientic networks on
Twitter: Analyzing scientists’ interactions in the climate change debate.
Public Understanding of Science, 28(6), 696-712. http://doi.org/gf4c58
