Science Communication vs Science Dissemination – What's the Difference?
Science communication and science dissemination are often used interchangeably. In funding applications, project reports, and institutional impact assessments, the two terms frequently appear as if they mean the same thing. They don't – and conflating them has real consequences for how research reaches the people who need it.
Understanding the difference helps you plan more effectively, make a stronger case for communication in your proposals, and avoid the common mistake of ticking the communication box while actually only doing dissemination.
What is science dissemination?
Dissemination is the sharing of research outputs with other specialists. Journal articles, conference presentations, preprints, data repositories, professional newsletters, posts on institutional websites…all of these are dissemination activities.
The defining characteristic of dissemination is its audience: people with the expertise to access, understand, and build on your work. That might mean other marine scientists, researchers in adjacent fields, or professionals in industry or government who work closely with research. The goal is to advance knowledge within a field and make your findings available to those who can use them directly.
Dissemination is essential. Without it, scientific progress stagnates. But it has limits. A journal article behind a paywall, written in technical language, read by a few hundred specialists, does not reach the policymaker deciding on marine protected area boundaries, the fishing community whose livelihoods depend on sustainable stock management, or the educator trying to bring current ocean science into the classroom.
This is where science communication comes in.
What is science communication?
Science communication is the engagement of non-specialist audiences with the purpose, process, and findings of science. The goal is understanding, relevance, and, where appropriate, action.
Where dissemination speaks to people already inside the field, science communication reaches outward: to policymakers, journalists, educators, community groups, businesses, and the wider public. It requires not just sharing your findings but translating them into language that is accessible without being inaccurate, framed in ways that are relevant to audiences who didn't study marine biology, and delivered through channels that actually reach the people you're trying to engage.
Some researchers, such as Dr Sam Illingworth, find it helpful to think of this as the difference between inward-facing and outward-facing communication. Inward-facing communication (dissemination) keeps knowledge circulating within the scientific community. Outward-facing communication (science communication) connects that knowledge with the wider world.
Why the distinction matters for ocean research
In ocean science, the gap between what researchers know and what informs decisions is significant. Marine protected areas are designated without the best available science. Fisheries are managed using outdated stock assessments. Coastal communities make decisions about their futures without access to research that directly affects them. Communication – genuine outward-facing science communication – is part of how that gap closes.
Yet ocean research projects routinely conflate dissemination with communication. A project that produces journal articles, presents at conferences, and shares findings in specialist newsletters may report all of these as science communication activities. They are not. They are dissemination activities. Yes, that is incredibly valuable, but it’s not the same thing as outward communication. This matters practically for several reasons.
Funders are increasingly aware of the distinction. Many funding bodies, particularly at the European level, now expect genuine public engagement and outreach – not just dissemination. Projects that can only point to journal articles and conference presentations when asked about their communication activities may find themselves short of what's needed for impact reporting.
The two activities require different skills and different resources. Dissemination is something most researchers can handle themselves. It's part of how science works. Science communication often requires additional expertise: understanding of audiences, communication craft, knowledge of channels and platforms, and the ability to translate complex ideas without losing their accuracy. Building this into a project from the start, rather than treating it as an afterthought, makes a significant difference to what's achievable.
The cost of not doing it is real. Ocean science that stays within the scientific community, however rigorous and important, cannot influence decisions made by people who never encounter it. In a field where the stakes are as high as they are in ocean science, that's a cost worth taking seriously.
If your project is doing dissemination but calling it science communication, it may be worth taking stock. The best time to build genuine outward-facing communication into a project is at the proposal stage but if you're already underway, it's not too late to make changes. Ocean Oculus supports ocean research projects with science communication built around real audiences and real goals.
