Science Communication: It's More Complex Than Simply Simplifying

Summary

This 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

00:00

🔬 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.

05:01

🌐 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.

10:03

🌟 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.

15:04

🌱 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.

Keywords

💡Science Communication

Science communication refers to the process of conveying scientific information to the public in a manner that is accessible and understandable. In the video, it is discussed as more than just simplifying complex scientific concepts; it's about ensuring the information has meaning within the context of people's lives. The video challenges the traditional view that simplification alone is sufficient for effective communication, emphasizing the need to consider the complexity of the real world.

💡Simplification

Simplification is the process of making complex ideas or data easier to understand by reducing them to their most basic elements. The script critiques the assumption that science must be simplified for public understanding, arguing that facts only have meaning within the context of a complex environment. It suggests that oversimplification can strip away the richness and applicability of scientific knowledge.

💡Action

In the context of the video, action refers to the behavioral changes or responses that are expected to follow from the dissemination of scientific information. The video challenges the notion that knowledge always leads to action, highlighting that external factors such as environment and infrastructure must support the action for it to occur. It uses the example of people being told to wash their hands but lacking access to running water.

💡Mass Audience

The term 'mass audience' or 'masa' refers to the collective group of people who are the recipients of mass communication. The video critiques the idea of a monolithic mass audience, emphasizing the diversity and individuality of audiences. It argues for a more nuanced understanding of audiences, considering factors such as age, gender, location, and media usage, as illustrated by the varied responses to typhoon warnings across different regions.

💡Cultural Diversity

Cultural diversity acknowledges the variety of cultures, each with its own beliefs, practices, and ways of understanding the world. The video uses the example of different provinces in the Philippines having distinct interpretations of weather warnings during Typhoon Yolanda, showing how cultural context shapes the reception and understanding of scientific information.

💡Infrastructure

Infrastructure refers to the basic physical and organizational structures needed for the operation of a society or enterprise. In the video, it is highlighted as a critical factor that can either support or hinder the implementation of knowledge-based actions. The lack of running water, for instance, undermines the effectiveness of handwashing campaigns.

💡Storm Surge

A storm surge is a coastal flood caused by the force of the wind pushing on the surface of the sea during a storm. In the video, the term is used to illustrate how different communities understand and respond to weather phenomena based on their cultural context and past experiences, such as the confusion and differing interpretations of storm surge warnings during Typhoon Yolanda.

💡Scientific Method

The scientific method is a systematic approach to research that involves forming a hypothesis, testing it through experiments, and drawing conclusions based on the results. The video suggests that science is not just confined to the laboratory but is a part of everyday life, involving a process of questioning, testing, and replicability that everyone can engage in.

💡Replicability

Replicability in science refers to the ability of other researchers to reproduce the results of an experiment or study. The video emphasizes the importance of replicability as a cornerstone of the scientific process, ensuring that findings are reliable and valid.

💡Curiosity

Curiosity is the desire to learn or know more about something. The video likens the inquisitive nature of children to the ideal approach to science, suggesting that maintaining curiosity and a questioning mindset is essential for both scientific inquiry and everyday problem-solving.

💡Empowering

Empowering refers to the process of giving individuals or groups the authority or ability to take action. In the context of the video, empowering people is about enabling them to define their own problems, create solutions, and engage in critical thinking, which is seen as a key aspect of effective science communication.

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