Understanding How the Public Consumes Science and Research
By Lindsay Lewis
“When scientists are able to communicate effectively beyond their peers to broader, non-scientist audiences, it builds support for science, promotes understanding of its wider relevance to society, and encourages more informed decision-making at all levels, from government to communities to individuals,” writes Mónica I. Feliú-Mójer in a Scientific American blog.
But how do we define “communicate effectively?”
Looking at the evidence, the science world may not be communicating so effectively. In a 1999 op-ed published Nature Biotechnology, Swiss professor Richard Braun discussed the growing public distrust in science and what should be done about it. That was more than 20 years ago – have things improved?
The problem then (and now) is not just a lack of understanding of the science by the public but a failure of researchers to communicate.
“The entire conversation about science is lacking,” said Kristi Roschke, Ph.D., the managing director of Arizona State University’s News Co/Lab and digital media literacy instructor in the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication. “We don’t talk enough about how the science is produced. We gloss over how we came to conclusions.”
And then there’s the issue of a few difficult words.
“People don’t use jargon,” said Laura Lindenfeld, Ph.D., director for the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science at Stony Brook University in New York. “We suffer from the curse of knowledge and we forget what it’s like not to know something.”
Beyond Words
But is the solution a matter of using simple words to explain things to the public?
Effectively communicating the science is deeply rooted in communication theory, which is strategically lacking at a national level, according to Lindenfeld.
“We need to help the science community understand that the information communicated to people is perceived differently based on their world views, belief systems and values,” she said.
Roschke agrees. “We make a lot of assumptions about what people know and what they believe, their level of education – we miss a lot.”
Take the COVID vaccine. The safety of vaccines has long been debated due to some conflicting findings, though history will point to the overwhelming evidence of positive outcomes when it comes to public health. But a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine shows that a large majority of Americans were undecided about the vaccine, though experts said that it was safe.
“The public perceptions of its effectiveness may not align with expert views,” state the authors, who allude to the fact that there is little understanding of what is being communicated by scientists and researchers.
“Vaccines often backfire,” said Lindenfeld. “We often think people are empty vessels that need to be filled with knowledge and that if we just teach them to do things, they will. That’s not how humans function.”
Lindenfeld points to all the cultural, political and socio-economic influences that affect how different people perceive that knowledge.
“When people have values and beliefs and we ask them to abandon what they know and the trust they have in their culture, we’re asking them to give up their left foot.”
