Body & Soul5 mins ago
What is the most important principle or factor in effectively communicating research to non-specialists?
Im attending a training course next week and one of the mini tasks I have to prepare for the course is to come up with an answer to the following question...any help or thoughts would be greatly appreciated!!
What do you think is the most important principle or factor in effectively communicating research to non-specialists?
What do you think is the most important principle or factor in effectively communicating research to non-specialists?
Answers
1 to 12 of 12
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dorts. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The stereotypical answer to this is jargon.
Non specialists do not have the same vocablary and where they do do not always use the same words with the same meaning or precision as specialists.
I'm sure this is the answer they expect from you.
However I believe an equally important barrier is the lack of a mental model.
A non-technical car driver probably has a vague idea that there is an electric motor that starts his car.
One day the car fails to start. The mechanic has a more detailed mental model and understands how the battery also supplys energy to the spark plugs etc.
The specialist using this mental model performs a series of steps that may seem baffling to the driver and fixes the problem.
Because specialists often have very detailed mental models they often forget that others do not and that thing that are blinding obvious to them are not to others.
This may lead to a lack of trust - the non-technition does not see why X implies Y and is being asked to take it on trust - in the end the mass of things that he is being asked to take on trust makes the whole area look to him like a house of cards.
You can tell people facts to give them knowledge or you can help them build a mental model to give them understanding
Non specialists do not have the same vocablary and where they do do not always use the same words with the same meaning or precision as specialists.
I'm sure this is the answer they expect from you.
However I believe an equally important barrier is the lack of a mental model.
A non-technical car driver probably has a vague idea that there is an electric motor that starts his car.
One day the car fails to start. The mechanic has a more detailed mental model and understands how the battery also supplys energy to the spark plugs etc.
The specialist using this mental model performs a series of steps that may seem baffling to the driver and fixes the problem.
Because specialists often have very detailed mental models they often forget that others do not and that thing that are blinding obvious to them are not to others.
This may lead to a lack of trust - the non-technition does not see why X implies Y and is being asked to take it on trust - in the end the mass of things that he is being asked to take on trust makes the whole area look to him like a house of cards.
You can tell people facts to give them knowledge or you can help them build a mental model to give them understanding
I agree with heathfield and jake over this question - simplicity of language is vital in conveying research to non-specialists.
A few years ago, I bought a large paperback called "Asimov's New Guide to Science". The book had been written by that famous author of science-fiction, Isaac Asimov. However, what most people don't realise is that Asimov was not only an author of fiction, but a well regarded biochemist as well.
The book is astonishing in that it discusses virtually all branches of science up to the date of the last edition, which I think was 1993. The depth of coverage is detailed and the book provides an authoritative summary of all the knowledge of biological and physical sciences to that year.
It seems impossible that one man could write such a book, and I'll be honest, to my mind, I consider it a greater achievement as a single volume than that infamous work by Hawking.
The book covers everything from astronomy to zoology in extraordinary detail and over the years, I've lent copies of the book to scientists of all disciplines, none of which have been able to criticise the content apart from the fact that it's slightly dated nowadays.
The principle reason this book is so appealing is that it is entirely readable by the layman from the front cover to the back as it contains virtually no jargon. In reading the book, the reader is slowly drawn from one subject to another by the authors anecdotes and Asimov's ability to entice the reader to read more by maintaining an interest lacking when reading dusty old textbooks.
In many ways, it can be read in a similar manner to a novel or dipped into as desired. In fact, my oldest copy is dog-eared because of the amount of dipping in I've done to it over the years but it still takes the prime position on my bookshelves at home.
Cont
A few years ago, I bought a large paperback called "Asimov's New Guide to Science". The book had been written by that famous author of science-fiction, Isaac Asimov. However, what most people don't realise is that Asimov was not only an author of fiction, but a well regarded biochemist as well.
The book is astonishing in that it discusses virtually all branches of science up to the date of the last edition, which I think was 1993. The depth of coverage is detailed and the book provides an authoritative summary of all the knowledge of biological and physical sciences to that year.
It seems impossible that one man could write such a book, and I'll be honest, to my mind, I consider it a greater achievement as a single volume than that infamous work by Hawking.
The book covers everything from astronomy to zoology in extraordinary detail and over the years, I've lent copies of the book to scientists of all disciplines, none of which have been able to criticise the content apart from the fact that it's slightly dated nowadays.
The principle reason this book is so appealing is that it is entirely readable by the layman from the front cover to the back as it contains virtually no jargon. In reading the book, the reader is slowly drawn from one subject to another by the authors anecdotes and Asimov's ability to entice the reader to read more by maintaining an interest lacking when reading dusty old textbooks.
In many ways, it can be read in a similar manner to a novel or dipped into as desired. In fact, my oldest copy is dog-eared because of the amount of dipping in I've done to it over the years but it still takes the prime position on my bookshelves at home.
Cont
The most Improtant thing is to ASK people if they are following you, dont be afraid to go back and start again if people are struggling And dont rush. students will often say yes, even if they are completely lost,
Also try not to 'skip' little details that seem obvious to you.
A teacher may fully understand steps one to twenty of a process but will often miss out steps two, seven, nine and fifteen because to them they are so obvious as to not need thinking about
I think its also very important to try and explain why you are doing something, not just how to do it. I recently watched a fellow engineer showing a sixteen year old apprentice how to install a set of resistors into a particular device. The young lad picked it up no problem, but when I asked him why he had done it, he couldnt answer, he didnt even know what a resistor actually does.
Am I making sense?
Also try not to 'skip' little details that seem obvious to you.
A teacher may fully understand steps one to twenty of a process but will often miss out steps two, seven, nine and fifteen because to them they are so obvious as to not need thinking about
I think its also very important to try and explain why you are doing something, not just how to do it. I recently watched a fellow engineer showing a sixteen year old apprentice how to install a set of resistors into a particular device. The young lad picked it up no problem, but when I asked him why he had done it, he couldnt answer, he didnt even know what a resistor actually does.
Am I making sense?
Just a quick post - but some good answers here.
The art (art? In science !!?) of communicating in this context is a fine balance between avoiding jargon and not appearing to be patronising.
Where this line lies varies immensely according to the receptiveness of the 'audience' - and the greater the variance in this, the harder the task.
Re-reading your question - perhaps 'being unambiguous' could be the answer. From first hand, I have seen scientific papers that say "there is a statistical correlation between A & B", become (by the time it is published in the relevant journal, summarised in New Scientist and interpreted into one paragraph / headline in a tabloid newspaper) to; "B causes A !!!"
The art (art? In science !!?) of communicating in this context is a fine balance between avoiding jargon and not appearing to be patronising.
Where this line lies varies immensely according to the receptiveness of the 'audience' - and the greater the variance in this, the harder the task.
Re-reading your question - perhaps 'being unambiguous' could be the answer. From first hand, I have seen scientific papers that say "there is a statistical correlation between A & B", become (by the time it is published in the relevant journal, summarised in New Scientist and interpreted into one paragraph / headline in a tabloid newspaper) to; "B causes A !!!"
There are some great answers here, but I will put in my two cents. Communicating research to non-specialists is very difficult and often tests how well you understand your own research. The magnitude of this difficulty really depends on your specific topic of research, the type of data you will be presenting, and how familiar your audience is with that type of data. For example, if you are talking about temperature variation is certain system, most people have some understanding of what temperature is, and you will probably have enough time to do a review and explain why the observed temperature trend means what you say it means. However, if you are talking about isotopic fractionation of stable oxygen isotopes in water due to condensation, it will be much more difficult to explain why you interpreted the data the way you did because most people are not familiar at all with stable isotope fractionation. You should try to explain the process in very simplified terms, but at some point you may have to ask the audience just to take your word for it. Also, as mentioned above, use lots of pictures and cartoons. Also, try to provide more than one example or conceptual model to describe the process of interest. I hope this helps.
Well said theprof. Asimov's guide is also one of my favourite books. He wrote many other scientific books for the general public but unfortunately many are now out of print.
Asimov's Guide to Chemistry is quite brilliant and he also did one on the Bible.
He was also the author of a couple of books of "dirty" limericks and I wish I had copies of them now.
"A young girl from South Carolina,
Had a G-string acoss her vag....." etc
My favourite author along with Arthur C Clarke.
Sorry dorts - I know this has nothing to do with your question.
Asimov's Guide to Chemistry is quite brilliant and he also did one on the Bible.
He was also the author of a couple of books of "dirty" limericks and I wish I had copies of them now.
"A young girl from South Carolina,
Had a G-string acoss her vag....." etc
My favourite author along with Arthur C Clarke.
Sorry dorts - I know this has nothing to do with your question.
Thanks for that Gef - it's nice to come across another admirer of that outstanding and prolific author.
I knew about Asimov's Guide to the Bible, but I've also looked through copies of his guides to Halley's Comet and even the volumes on Shakespeare and the History of the World. He was able to write with first rate authority on all these subjects and others, which would be an impossibility for most people.
Having been a fan of detective fiction/mysteries for many years, I also love his short-stories about the Black Widowers. What other author would invent an opening scene to each tale where a guest to a club is asked how they justified their existence? What an opening line!
Apologies from me as well dorts!
I knew about Asimov's Guide to the Bible, but I've also looked through copies of his guides to Halley's Comet and even the volumes on Shakespeare and the History of the World. He was able to write with first rate authority on all these subjects and others, which would be an impossibility for most people.
Having been a fan of detective fiction/mysteries for many years, I also love his short-stories about the Black Widowers. What other author would invent an opening scene to each tale where a guest to a club is asked how they justified their existence? What an opening line!
Apologies from me as well dorts!
-- answer removed --
1 to 12 of 12
Latest Posts
Film, Media & TV7 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles9 mins ago
Crosswords11 mins ago
ChatterBank32 mins ago
Music35 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.