TABLE 5.

Quality expectations.

Quality expectation	Categories	Example	#Codes
Process	Comprehensibility	“Summarize findings in a generally understandable, audience-oriented, and brief and concise manner” (NGO_ID60, 16).	26
	Form	“Knowledge should be transferred to the public through various and adapted transfer formats and communication channels, for example, transfer forums, workshops, lecture series as formats that can be used in a way that is appropriate to the target group and audience” (Intermediary_ID108, 16).	25
	Inclusivity	“Co-creative exchange between science and non-scientific actors is important. Each group contributes specific knowledge needed for complex problem solving” (SSHscholar_ID232, 15).	26
	Pertinence	“Knowledge and presumption must be clearly separated in the dialogue with society” (Economy_ID163, 36–37).	13
Outcome	Transparency	“It seems important to me that science communication also openly names the weaknesses of science. For example, peer review is no guarantee of quality” (SSHscholar_ID138, 30).	30
	Relevance	“At the same time, the relevance of science to the reality of life must be recognizable and tangible. This last point in particular is often missing in the social sciences” (Media_ID57, 20).	31
Person	Empathy	“Good cooperation means engaging with the other side and listening without prejudice” (SSHscholar_ID224, 16).	67
	Disinterestedness	“In my view, a good exchange is characterized above all by the fact that it is not primarily guided and inspired by the self-promotional intentions of individual scientists or scientific organizations” (SSHscholar_ID37, 16).	14