Science Communication: It's More Complex Than Simply Simplifying
Summary
TLDRThis script challenges conventional views on science communication, questioning the need to simplify scientific information for the public. It argues that facts need context and meaning within complex environments. It also addresses the misconception that knowledge automatically leads to action, emphasizing the importance of supportive infrastructure. The script debunks the 'mass audience' myth, highlighting audience diversity and the importance of understanding local cultures. It concludes by suggesting that science is not just for experts but is a part of everyday life, and effective communication involves engaging in dialogue and empowering people to solve problems.
Takeaways
- 🔬 Science communication is often defined as simplifying complex scientific information for the public, but this approach may overlook the importance of context and complexity in understanding.
- 🌟 Scientists simplify the world to understand it better, but facts and information need to be understood within the context of a complex environment to have meaning.
- 🏗️ The assumption that knowledge always leads to action is flawed; external factors like environment and infrastructure greatly influence whether knowledge translates into action.
- 🌐 The 'mass audience' or 'masa' assumption is misleading; audiences are diverse and have unique cultural understandings and experiences that should be acknowledged.
- 🌊 During Typhoon Yolanda, the understanding of 'storm surge' varied across different regions, highlighting the importance of local context in science communication.
- 👥 The audience is not a monolithic entity; it's crucial to ask detailed questions about their demographics, media usage, and interests to tailor effective communication.
- 🧠 The idea that people know nothing about science is incorrect; science is a part of everyday life and involves systematic processes that everyone can engage in.
- 🧪 Science is not confined to laboratories; it's about a set of logical processes that can be applied to everyday situations and problem-solving.
- 🌟 Effective science communication involves more than just disseminating information; it's about having conversations, understanding local realities, and empowering people.
- 🌱 Encouraging curiosity, questioning, and critical thinking is at the heart of science and science communication, which should aim to make people think and ask questions freely.
Q & A
What is the traditional definition of science communication?
-Traditionally, science communication is defined as providing simplified scientific information to the lay public to help them make informed decisions.
What are the four major assumptions that underlie the traditional definition of science communication?
-The four major assumptions are: 1) science must be simplified for it to be understood, 2) knowledge always leads to action, 3) there is a myth of a homogenous mass audience, and 4) people know nothing about science.
Why is the assumption that science must be simplified for understanding problematic?
-This assumption is problematic because it overlooks the fact that facts only have meaning within the context of a complex environment. Simplification can strip away the complexity necessary for true understanding.
How does the script challenge the idea that knowledge always leads to action?
-The script challenges this idea by pointing out that people may not act immediately upon receiving new information, as their actions are influenced by their environment and supporting infrastructure.
What is the 'myth of the mass audience' and why is it a misconception?
-The 'myth of the mass audience' refers to the assumption that all people in the public are the same and can be communicated to in a uniform manner. It is a misconception because it ignores the diversity and individuality of the audience.
What is a real-world example provided in the script that challenges the 'myth of the mass audience'?
-The script discusses the different understandings of 'storm surge' among people from the eastern and western seaboards of the Philippines during Typhoon Yolanda, showing that audience understanding is not uniform.
How does the script redefine the concept of science being something that is confined to a laboratory?
-The script redefines science as a set of systematic processes that are part of everyday life, not just confined to laboratories or jargon.
What does the script suggest as an alternative to simply transmitting information in science communication?
-The script suggests having conversations, empowering people to define and solve their own problems, and encouraging critical thinking and curiosity as alternatives to mere information transmission.
Why do some scientists believe that children are the best scientists?
-Some scientists believe that children are the best scientists because they are naturally curious, never tire of asking questions, and do not accept answers without understanding.
What is the role of the audience in science communication according to the script?
-According to the script, the audience should not be seen as passive recipients of information but as active participants who can define problems, create solutions, and engage in critical thinking.
How does the script view the relationship between science and everyday life?
-The script views science as an integral part of everyday life, involving systematic processes and critical thinking that everyone can apply, rather than as a separate, specialized field.
Outlines
🔬 Rethinking Simplification in Science Communication
The paragraph discusses the conventional view of science communication as simplifying complex scientific information for the public. It challenges the assumption that simplification is necessary for understanding, explaining how scientists simplify the world in labs to understand phenomena but then test these simplifications in the complex real world. The speaker suggests that facts only have meaning within the context of a complex environment and that science communication should aim to fit facts back into a complex human story rather than oversimplifying them.
🌐 The Myth of the Mass Audience in Science Communication
This paragraph delves into the third assumption of science communication, which is the myth of the 'mass audience' or 'masa'. It argues against the unjust judgment of lumping people into a single category and calls for a deeper understanding of the audience. The speaker uses the example of Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) to illustrate how different communities have different perceptions and understandings of weather warnings, highlighting the diversity and complexity of audiences and the importance of not making assumptions about them.
🌟 The Everyday Science and Its Communication
The speaker addresses the final assumption that people know nothing about science and need to be informed. Through interviews with scientists, the paragraph explores different perspectives on what makes science special. It emphasizes that science is not confined to laboratories but is a part of everyday life, involving systematic processes of questioning and testing. The speaker suggests that science communication should be about engaging in conversations, empowering people to define and solve their own problems, and encouraging curiosity and critical thinking.
🌱 Encouraging Curiosity and Critical Thinking in Science
In this final paragraph, the speaker concludes by emphasizing the importance of making people curious and encouraging them to ask questions. It suggests that science is about freedom to inquire and that communication should foster an environment where people can critically think, recognize problems, and share solutions democratically. The paragraph ends with a call to action to make people think and see the world as a place where questions are welcomed and encouraged.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Science Communication
💡Simplification
💡Action
💡Mass Audience
💡Cultural Diversity
💡Infrastructure
💡Storm Surge
💡Scientific Method
💡Replicability
💡Curiosity
💡Empowering
Highlights
Science communication is about simplifying scientific information for the public to make informed decisions.
The assumption that science must be simplified for understanding is challenged.
Scientists simplify the world to understand it, then test these facts in complex environments.
Facts need context to have meaning; they don't exist objectively outside of complexity.
Science communication should fit facts into complex human stories.
Knowledge does not always lead to action; external environment support is crucial.
Infrastructure is necessary for people to act on the information they receive.
The 'mass audience' or 'masa' myth oversimplifies the diversity of the public.
Audience understanding is diverse and influenced by culture, media use, and personal experiences.
People's understanding of scientific terms can be influenced by their local experiences and media.
The story of Typhoon Yolanda shows the importance of understanding local perceptions of scientific warnings.
The eastern seaboard's perception of storm surges was influenced by media coverage of Typhoon Yolanda.
The western seaboard's understanding of storm surges was different, valuing the term over a local translation.
Science is not confined to the laboratory; it's a part of everyday life and problem-solving.
Science is a systematic set of processes, not just a body of knowledge.
Science communication is about having conversations and empowering people to define and solve their own problems.
Encouraging curiosity and questioning is central to science and science communication.
The goal of science communication is to create a world where questions are freely asked and explored.
Transcripts
[Music]
science communication you might have
heard
this term before it's intuitively
defined
as giving simplified scientific
information
to the lay public in order for them to
make informed decisions
if you haven't heard this term before
then you might have seen different forms
of it
maybe in the way people are called
hard-headed when they're given
information and they don't obey or when
they're told that they're uneducated
or uninformed but what if
we change the way we look at that
definition
what if there are assumptions beneath
that definition
that keep us from understanding how
science communication can really be done
there are four major assumptions that
underlie
science communication and the way it's
defined
let's take a look at those four
assumptions and let's take a look
at how those assumptions might be turned
around
so that we can do science communication
the first assumption is that in order
for science to be understood it has to
be simplified
this would be all right but let's first
understand what science does
for most laboratory sciences
scientists take the complex outside
world
bring them into the laboratory use
experimental setups
and check variables they try to remove
all sorts of variables that might
complicate the phenomenon and keep them
from understanding it
scientists simplify the world in order
to understand it
and then they take these facts once
again
test them once again in the outside
world and see if they hold up
under complex conditions which is why
you have greenhouses
field tests or even long-term vaccine
tests
if merely simplifying can help us
understand
science then there is one part that
we're missing in there
it's meaning facts
information will only have meaning in
the context of a complex
environment facts don't
exist objectively they don't hop out of
the laboratory
they can't be put into the outside world
and called
objective facts we can't understand
information
unless we see it in all its complexity
and how it fits into the complex human
experience
instead perhaps we can look at
science communication as a way to fit
fats once again into a complex
human story let's take a look
at another assumption in order to
understand
this dichotomy between simplification
and understanding
this knowledge always lead to action
when was the last time you read
something online
and then stood up immediately and
changed your behavior
maybe you read an article that said eat
colorful berries and those antioxidants
will help you live a better life did you
stand up immediately
did you go out to the grocery store pick
up a one kilogram bag of blueberries
take it home and eat it
or did you wait a minute think for a
while and
say do i have the budget for this
maybe not or did you go out because you
had a budget
knowledge doesn't always lead to action
giving people information doesn't always
lead to them doing something
people can only take action
if their outside environment supports
that action
you can do all the information
dissemination you want
put them into all these pretty brochures
and have beautiful graphs that chart
everything from
april to may to june to july
but if no supporting infrastructure is
helping you out
you are powerless to do whatever order
is given to you
you can tell people to wash their hands
day in and day out
but if there is no running water in
places where they live
your information disseminations for
nothing
in order to look closely at knowledge
and action
let's take a look at the third
assumption that underlies
the whole idea of giving information to
the lay public
we like to call this the myth of the
mass audience
or masa we use the term a lot
mass communication communicating to the
masses
in filipino it might sound like this
translate that directly into english
they're just the masses
let them have fun let them joke
make them happy they'll be fine
on the surface maybe that's nice for the
next couple of minutes
but if you look closely at how the words
are spoken
you will see how unjust that judgment
can be
you can see how unjust it would be to
put people into boxes and simply call
them
masa who is this audience
let's ask questions about it let's make
no assumptions
how old are they are they male or female
what generation are they from where do
they live
let's ask even deeper questions how do
they use their media
are they entertained by the news or
informed
and when they're entertained are they
informed or do they just watch
something for entertainment and escape
and then run away and think you know
what this is not for me
whatever there are so many questions
that we can ask about our audience
let me tell you a story in 2015-2016
i traveled the country with some
researchers in order to understand how
different provinces
understood the weather warnings that
came during typhoon yolanda
during typhoon yolanda internationally
known as typhoon haiyan
people were not able to escape storm
surges
we lost thousands of lives and thousands
are still missing
those who observed what happened during
and after yolanda
immediately said that people
didn't understand the term storm surge
and it should have been
translated into the native language
if we had stopped at these translations
and if we had stopped
at these assumptions it would have
changed the way that we did the research
we could have asked questions such as do
you understand what the luyong is
do you know what the storm surge is but
we had to probe further we found that
for some
provinces on the eastern seaboard
people knew what the storm surge was
even before
yolanda but here was the problem
in the last news that they had ever
watched
they saw that a storm surge damaged
metro manila
only because it damaged the sea wall
and it damaged the hotel so they
remember the storm surge
as a high wave that damages basements
they wish it had been called a tsunami
scientists i can hear you screaming of
course not a tsunami isn't caused by a
storm
but they remembered the tsunami of 2011.
they remembered the waves that swept
inland they
saw the footage on tv they lived
vicariously through the media
that was their reality
this was the eastern seaboard where they
trusted the news
and they trusted the images that they
saw on television
let's go to the western seaboard we
asked
how they understood the warnings and
they told us
please don't translate anything into
tagalog we don't know what daluyong is
call it a storm surge we know what that
is we've always known what a storm surge
is
this is interesting on so many different
levels because it tells us
that even in the same country with its 7
000 plus plus plus plus islands
nearly every single municipality has a
different culture from the other
and nearly every single culture has its
own understanding
of weather of environment
of a world out there that is far more
complex than simply facts that are set
in stone
our audience is diverse it's not put in
a box
it's not masa and this brings me to the
final assumption
people know nothing about science i mean
you do have to give them information
right for them to make a decision
let me tell you another story for my
dissertation i had to interview
scientists from the philippines and the
u.s
on what they thought science
communication was all about
and that entailed asking them what they
thought
science was all about and what made
science special
so i asked them point blank what makes
science special
some scientists said that they wish
other people were scientists too
because other people don't fall in line
in the grocery and they don't think
rationally and they always use their
emotions
but some scientists said a very
different thing
one said that the best scientists are
children
because children ask questions they
never tire of asking questions and if
you tell them
well basta or no because i say so
they don't get it they just keep on
asking and asking
they're still curious another scientist
said that there are people who mow lawns
there are people who cook food and there
are people who clean houses and there
are people who do business and then
there are scientists
we're all the same we all have our own
professions
but my favorite was a nanotechnologist
and an engineer
who said science is not special
well he continued this way
science isn't special why
how different is laboratory work
sitting down and creating different
setups
and documenting everything from the chef
who sits in the kitchen creates 10
different setups of the same dish
with different concentrations of a spice
and documents everything how different
is science scientific work from
a child playing lego and testing
different colors and testing different
heights
to see which tower will stand
science is not confined to the
laboratory he said
i don't think he was saying that science
is not special at all
but what i think he was saying is that
science is
not imprisoned in a lab
science is everyday life it's not a body
of knowledge or a body of facts that you
have to memorize
it's a set of processes it's a
systematic
set of processes that proceed logically
from one
step to the next there is no single
scientific method that you have to be
quizzed on
from the hypothesis all the way to the
references
but there is a process where each step
logically follows where each step is
justified
where we have to look at every source of
information
and see if we get things right and see
if
every step is replicable see if our
results are replicable
we have to check our sources of
information to check if they're
actually trustworthy or if we have to
check them
science is not something that you keep
in a lab
or you keep away from people or hide
behind
jargon and it's not merely about
taking all these facts and giving them
to the public
science can be something as simple
as looking at different facts
weighing them looking at background
information
weighing that background information
against
one another looking at what is
trustworthy
science can be as simple as testing all
the light bulbs in your house to see
which one works in what position
science is not stagnant science is
in the everyday is everyday
life and communication doesn't have to
be about transmitting information
it's not just throwing out information
and waiting for somebody to respond
it can be as simple as having
conversations with people
to see what their environment is like to
see what their reality is all about
to see what that storm surge really was
in their reality versus the storm surge
you read about
in your textbook or it can be all about
empowering people to define their own
problems
to create their own solutions that's
communication
and maybe making people think again
critique again recognize problems
democratically share those problems
check their sources before sharing
going through their lives step by step
and thinking through things
recognizing where there are problems and
not simply defending them because of
partisan divides
making people think again curious again
ask questions again be children again
and encourage people to think and see
a world where we can ask questions and
be
free to ask them that is science
[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
communication
[Music]
[Laughter]
[Music]
you
Weitere ähnliche Videos ansehen
AP Psychology Unit 2 Psychology as a Science Part 1
Relationship between Language and Culture। Language and Culture।
PR - Module 3 - Session 3 - Youssef El Hely - YQC
Elementos da Comunicação - Teoria da Comunicação - Aula 1
BONGKAR CARA KOMUNIKASI YANG EFEKTIF | Rangkuman Buku Bicara Itu Ada Seninya
5 Things You Should Know About Racism | Decoded | MTV News
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)