Files
Abstract
Access to evaluation findings of interdisciplinary research and extension initiatives is essential for informed decision-making and trust building by decision makers, wider stakeholders, and the public in general. The ways these findings are communicated publicly can limit their effectiveness. Communication formats like graphs and infographic offer promising solutions for improving perceptions, but their effectiveness may depend on more than visual clarity. This dissertation examined how communication strategies influenced cognitive processing, trust, and attitude of the wider public. Respondents in quantitative research from diverse demographic backgrounds were exposed to evaluation findings of interdisciplinary research and extension initiatives in different formats. Findings indicated that while visual formats like graphs improved cognitive processing, trust in organizations remained the strongest mediator of perceptions toward trust in the scientific source. Infographic, while visually engaging, did not consistently outperform other formats. The results implied that enhancing the accessibility of evaluation findings through visual design was important but insufficient without building organizational credibility and transparency. This research contributed to the evaluation and science communication discourse by providing insights for designing communication strategies that promote public engagement with evaluation findings of interdisciplinary research and extension initiatives. Implications for evaluators and science communicators included the need for clear, culturally responsive messaging and a stronger emphasis on trust-building practices in organizational communication.