From the Lab to the Kitchen Table | Discovery to Understanding​

How do we bridge the gap between scientific discovery and public understanding?

This episode tackles the breakdown in science communication fueling today's skepticism. Dr. Marisa M. Silveri (neuroscientist specializing in adolescent brain development and mental health, McLean Hospital/Harvard Medical School), Dr. David Shiffman (marine conservation biologist), and Dr. Sandeep Ravindran (science journalist, President of National Association of Science Writers) as they explore new ways to connect with audiences. Discover how to weave facts into compelling narratives and build trust through authentic dialogue.

Learn more about a new path forward for science communication here https://www.wiley.com/en-us/insights/featured-series/conversations/

#ScienceCommunication #SciComm #TrustInScience #PublicEngagement #discovery 

Chapters
00:00 Intro
01:30 What science communication means for researchers
02:58 Making research resonate with your audience
05:38 What audiences need: trust and understanding
07:33 Common pitfalls and how to avoid them
08:24 Moving beyond jargon: reaching broader audiences
10:10 What captures audience attention and why
12:38 Helping audiences navigate scientific uncertainty
15:00 Tackling misinformation where your audience lives
17:07 Building communication skills for researchers
20:25 Why researchers need to join forces now
21:12 How publishers can support researcher engagement
24:00 Sharing data to strengthen collaboration
25:27 Why transparency builds audience trust
28:00 Creating stronger partnerships across the pipeline
29:11 What's at stake for research and public trust
30:26 Getting started: advice for researchers

Transcript

The Conversations EP04 Sci Comm Transcript

[00:00:00] Jay Flynn: Hi everyone, and welcome to the Conversations, a show brought to you by Wiley, a global leader in research and education publishing. This series is about exploring the biggest opportunities in the world of academic publishing. It's about asking tough questions and getting into meaningful debate about where our industry needs to go.

[00:00:18] Jay Flynn: Now let's start the conversation. 

[00:00:21] Jay Flynn: Hi everybody. Welcome to the conversations. We're here to talk about the who, what, why. Of science communication today. 

[00:00:26] Dr. David Shiffman: I'm Dr. David Schiffman. I am a marine conservation biologist who study sharks and how to protect them. I'm also a public science engagement specialist and a science journalist and author.

[00:00:37] Dr. Marissa Silveri: Dr. Marissa Silveri. I direct the neurodevelopmental lab and addictions and mental health at McLean Hospital. I'm a neuroscientist by training and late life became a mental health counselor. I do a lot of community outreach in terms of bringing science to the public. 

[00:00:50] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: I'm Sandeep Ravindran. I'm a freelance science journalist.

[00:00:53] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: I cover life sciences and technology for a variety of publications, and I also do a lot of teaching and mentoring. 

[00:01:00] Jay Flynn: Are you also a doctor? Uh, 

[00:01:02] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: I also have a PhD. 

[00:01:03] Jay Flynn: Yeah. See, I'm the only one who's not. Uh, I'm Jay Flynn. I'm the Executive Vice President for Research and Learning at Wiley. My own sort of origin story, my journey into science probably begins when I was really little.

[00:01:15] Jay Flynn: Um, every summer, instead of going to camp or sitting at home and watching tv, I would go to the Dayton Museum of Natural History in Dayton, Ohio, and I would take classes called like Trees of Ohio. When we talk about. Science writing. What does science communication mean for you? 

[00:01:30] Dr. David Shiffman: I teach a graduate level science communication course and we spend an entire day on defining science communication.

[00:01:37] Dr. David Shiffman: And there's a lot of different definitions. There's a lot of competing definitions, but a few key things that I stress with that is it's someone who has some sort of technical subject matter expertise explaining something within that area of expertise to people who do not, 

[00:01:52] Jay Flynn: there's a, a word you used when you were describing your role.

[00:01:57] Jay Flynn: Um, and your passions, and it was different than communicator. It was interpreter, um. What's that distinction about for you? 

[00:02:06] Dr. Marissa Silveri: Well, I think science communication, from my perspective, you know, there are so many, you know, to both of your points, it's very complex, right? So it's very traditional. In graduate school you write these papers that will be peer reviewed and you know, you want to be able to be sophisticated and knowledgeable and provide expertise.

[00:02:25] Dr. Marissa Silveri: And then the other piece of it though is making that tangible for the public. And be that bridge to the deep understanding of this is why it's relevant to you. Right. So I feel like the interpretation, the interpreter part of my job is like I have the experience and the years to be able to read a paper that's been peer reviewed in a scientific publication, digest it and give it back in a way that really preserves sophistication and gives the message of how this is gonna help someone lead a healthier life.

[00:02:58] Jay Flynn: That's an incredible jumping off point to so many different topics that I want to get into today. It's gonna be hard to pick one. Can we focus on those use cases? Right? Making a healthcare decision, um. Give me a sense, and maybe Cindy, I'll start with you. Like how do you get a sense of what the impact story ought to be?

[00:03:16] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: So at the very basic level, you want to convey sort of, you know, the science that, like what happened. Right. But also I think to your point, the, the nuance and the complexity of what went into that result, right? I think one of the key things is to not sort of, not just spit out a fact. Right. Like, oh, the, you know, but the whole process of like, this is how, you know, how they found this out.

[00:03:39] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: These are the caveats, you know, to Right. Like why this is what we can save for now. Yeah. But that's, that is by no means definitive and you know, to convey that concept of like, this is a work in program. So this one study, you know, even if it's an excellent study and everyone agrees like this is amazing work is just one sort of, you know, like one building block in the sort of edifice of science, right, 

[00:04:05] Dr. Marissa Silveri: right.

[00:04:06] Jay Flynn: Caveats. I'm, I'm, I've written it down. I've double underline it. Yes. I'm gonna come back to it because there's a massive discussion to be had about all of that and the public's understanding of science and the scientific method and the way science works. Yeah, but coming back to impact for a second.

[00:04:22] Jay Flynn: Mm-hmm. 

[00:04:22] Dr. David Shiffman: We're trying to protect endangered species from various threats and scientific research is the best way to do that. Evidence-based, data-driven conservation planning. But those, the sort of technical manuscripts that get published in journals are always gonna be a vital piece underpinning that.

[00:04:38] Dr. David Shiffman: But someone needs to go from there to explaining to a fisherman why you can't use that piece of gear in the summertime. Someone needs to go from there to saying, uh, why you should use this type of bait and not that other type of bait. And that's, that's where this role of communicating, synthesizing science comes through.

[00:04:55] Dr. David Shiffman: And often for me, it's less communicating the results of a specific individual paper and more about sort of the synthesis of the field So far. 

[00:05:04] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I think probably in all of our roles, you have to know your audience and with parents. I think as a scientist you wanna be cautious not to overstate. Any finding, but in the sense of, you know, it occurs to me as you've asked the question that, Hmm.

[00:05:19] Dr. Marissa Silveri: Could we ever tell parents to be too safe with their children? Probably not. Probably not. We have a responsibility to share the science if we know something about the teenage brain and the risks and the harms. And, you know, as we think about alcohol use disorder and who's at risk for those types of, you know, situations, we really wanna take all the data.

[00:05:36] Dr. Marissa Silveri: It's a big responsibility to bear. 

[00:05:38] Jay Flynn: But a common thread in what you both just said is like, there's, there's all this data, um, there's data from all these different sources. Um. Your job's to synthesize it, to turn it into easy to understand messages. Um, then there's all the skepticism, um, skepticism from lived experience, skepticism from different values.

[00:05:59] Jay Flynn: Who knows where the skepticism comes from. Um, Sandeep, can we overcome this with logic? Can you overcome it like with the, the sense of like if you just understood the methods and the results and the double blind control in the study and all of that, do they need to understand the messages or the methods or do they, do they just.

[00:06:18] Jay Flynn: Need to trust the results. 

[00:06:20] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: There's a whole body of evidence on, you know, the studies of science communication and the impacts that basically tell you that just sort of no matter, like you can sort of convey the message, but without that trust right. You know, it's not gonna make a difference. So I think having that trust, whether it's, you know, directly with a scientist or with, you know, like a publication.

[00:06:43] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: And that's really key to, or you know, and I guess it's at all levels, right? It could be from your doctor, your, you know, your, your primary care physician, like, but whoever you're getting that message from that, I think that trust needs to be there to sort of get that message across 

[00:06:58] Dr. David Shiffman: when you're trying to convince people to not do something that they really want to do because of various harms, there are some people that are not gonna be convincible.

[00:07:06] Dr. David Shiffman: And to, to your earlier question, can you use logic and reason to convince someone? There's a, an old quote that you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themself into 

[00:07:15] Dr. Marissa Silveri: Well, and I think that applies across the board. So I think we have to be mindful of, you know, the nice thing about science communication is it's in the moment.

[00:07:22] Dr. Marissa Silveri: Here's this, you know, this soundbite that gives us information, but the science that led up to it, again, this very long arc in considering the audience, I think is a really big, important piece of it. 

[00:07:33] Jay Flynn: We've established that it's hard. What are the mistakes that, that you commonly see? What are the things we can stop doing as opposed to start doing or continue doing?

[00:07:41] Jay Flynn: What are some of the things we ought to stop doing in science communication as a professional, I'd love to hear some of your thoughts about, you know, where'd we get it wrong? 

[00:07:50] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: So in terms of like the, the pitfalls, I think one of the pitfalls is this sort of top down approach, whether it's, you know, from scientists or from publications like journalistic publications, 

[00:08:00] Jay Flynn: right?

[00:08:00] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I think that, you know, even in any communication of science, recognizing whoever's reading it or hearing it, they're all coming from their own unique place. 

[00:08:11] Jay Flynn: One of the things that, that I'm really conscious of as a publisher and we publish about. Quarter million, maybe 280,000 peer reviewed studies every year.

[00:08:24] Jay Flynn: Very few of them have, although I've been hearing about it forever, plain language summaries. Should I, as a publisher, invest a lot of money in that? 

[00:08:32] Dr. David Shiffman: A lot of the plain language summaries that I've seen in many journals are simply not very good. A lot of them simply don't summarize it in plain language.

[00:08:40] Dr. David Shiffman: It's what I guess the expert thought was plain language, but it's almost as if they've never talked to another person who's not a PhD biochemist. 

[00:08:47] Jay Flynn: Sure. 

[00:08:48] Dr. David Shiffman: And if the goal is plain language, you should ask someone in your life who is not a scientist. If they understand what the hell you're talking about, right?

[00:08:57] Dr. David Shiffman: Yeah. And if they don't, that's a bad sign. 

[00:08:59] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: So I like the fact that they have plain language summaries. Yeah. I completely agree with David that most of them are really not plain language. Uh, I think that's a combination of lack of training and also. Just effort. Right. I, I truly believe any scientist with sufficient effort could actually write a plain language summary of their, of their paper, because, you know, when they're describing it to their families that that's not how they talk.

[00:09:26] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: Right. Right. So it is. They have the skill, but probably, especially in, in a scientific journal, they're thinking, oh, well if I actually write it down in plain language, you know, there, there is this tendency to think that others will look down on me. 

[00:09:40] Dr. David Shiffman: I've seen sometimes this complaint about that, that, oh, it's another step I have to do.

[00:09:44] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I think that it's practice and its time and maybe there needs to be some support to help scientists write the lay summaries. Sure. So, you know, not a burden. Mm-hmm. But it's such an important part of the job. All the science that we conduct and collect the information, it's our responsibility to, to give it back in a way that's digestible.

[00:10:02] Jay Flynn: One of the questions I have about sort of science making in a public conversation and that sort of peer review to journalism pipeline is, has to do with the language and the, the barriers that language, um, creates when trying to get journalists to report on, on a paper. What's gonna make you. Like pick something up.

[00:10:25] Jay Flynn: Like if, is it that you get an assignment and you're gonna cover a particular topic or like what, what grabs your attention as someone who's spent a lot of time in this field, like what are the things that are going to get you to pay attention? 

[00:10:38] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: You know that, that's great question. And I've tried to sort of define what that is.

[00:10:43] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: And honestly, in the simplest terms, it's something that makes you go, wow. Right? Mm-hmm. Like it's as simple as that. Now, what that is specifically, you know, may like rely a bit on sort of your prior knowledge of like, oh, maybe, you know, this paper looks really interesting, but you know that this has been, you know, this is just sort of an incremental step on a lot of others sort of work that has already happened.

[00:11:07] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: It's one of those things where. People are all, like in my field, everyone's looking for, you know, like everyone goes through sort of high profile journals looking for papers and. It really is sort of like you develop a feel for what is newsworthy. 

[00:11:25] Jay Flynn: Right? 

[00:11:25] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: Everyone loves sharks. Sure. And people love things to do with the brain because it's part of sort of understanding ourselves.

[00:11:32] Jay Flynn: Human evolution, people 

[00:11:33] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: like that. Yeah, exactly. So think things that convey a sense of wonder, you know, that all of those things. And then there's the news you can use, right? Anything to do with health that is always very helpful is some things that are just cool, like new technology. So I think it's this sort of you, I don't, I've tried to think about like how best to define it, but it really is like this sort of sense you get of like, oh, this is like, this is something that people will pay attention to.

[00:12:01] Dr. David Shiffman: I also do freelance science journalism, but generally. Take a different approach from, from pe, from Sandeep and people at his level where if I look, there's 30 other high profile journalists who have written about that topic. For other outlets, I usually write about stuff that no one else is covering. Uh, so I wait until after it's published.

[00:12:19] Dr. David Shiffman: If there's a press release, I'm not gonna touch it and I can focus on sort of more niche issues that I am knowledgeable about because I am a subject matter area expert in there. I would say 95% of the stories I've written have started with. Wow. I, I like that, that it makes me read and go. That's really interesting.

[00:12:38] Jay Flynn: So capturing that sense of wonder, I mean, I, I think we can all relate to wow, right? Like, wow, there's a technology to image the brain. Wow. You know, we figured something out about an early primate, or we figured something out about shark Evolution, or we figured something out about a new energy technology that might not be a game changer.

[00:12:57] Jay Flynn: I think it's a huge structural barrier to talking about science that. Science changes. I think it's the beauty of science and the wonder of scientific discovery that science is always changing. Mm-hmm. But I do think, you know, I went to school in the seventies and my science textbook said one day we're gonna put a man on the moon.

[00:13:18] Jay Flynn: Right. And I was skeptical of my science textbook as a fourth grader and everything that was in it because the man had been to the moon. And I think the manifestation of that. In today's highly like social media amplified, highly politicized environment around science is skepticism about all science.

[00:13:38] Jay Flynn: Where have you had the most success at? M breaking that down for people. 

[00:13:44] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: I think the biggest thing, at least for me, you know, where I've seen, you know, sort of people understand, you know, the, the complexity of science is just really making sure to convey the process of science right, but providing both the nuance and the context.

[00:14:01] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: And typically what happens is in a, in a news story. They don't convey that, that context, they, they'll just say, oh, a new study came out that says eggs are bad for you. And I think it's really important no matter how short the story to sort of convey like that this was a process. Sure, here's why we thought, you know, something different earlier and this is why this has changed.

[00:14:22] Jay Flynn: Are there techniques though that, like what's your one neat trick for getting that notion across? 

[00:14:29] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I think for me, thinking about the technology, right, but with the development or the evolution of imaging technology, we actually can confirm what we've known from studying people after brain injury or after they've died.

[00:14:41] Dr. Marissa Silveri: And so what makes it new now? What makes it new now is this evolution of technology that allows us to have a window into the brain that is in real time. And so how has that changed what we've always known? I think that letting people know that it's really only, you know, it's like the next episode is coming.

[00:15:00] Jay Flynn: I wanna pick back up on this concept of convincing people with, um, logic in the, in the air of social media, convincing people of how do you explain a five arm clinical trial to somebody in a ten second TikTok video? 

[00:15:18] Dr. Marissa Silveri: That's a tough one. You know, without entirely, uh, diluting everything about it. Exactly.

[00:15:24] Dr. Marissa Silveri: What are you looking for? Sound bite. That's about all you have time for. 

[00:15:27] Jay Flynn: And then what do you do about bad actors? 

[00:15:29] Dr. David Shiffman: Yeah, so I, I am one of the most followed scientists on social media, and I've trained a couple thousand early career researchers all over the world how to use these tools for public science engagement.

[00:15:40] Dr. David Shiffman: And one of the. Biggest problems is bad actors. Sometimes there are people who really want to help, but they don't know what's really going on. Yeah, and those people tend to have messages that spread more rapidly, more vi, they go more viral than someone who's a re a PhD researcher. It's absolutely a huge problem dealing with these people who are spreading misinformation or in some cases even disinformation.

[00:16:04] Dr. David Shiffman: With things, uh, things like new ownership at Twitter, they changed it so that the fact checking rules aren't there anymore, so that blatantly wrong, harmful information is not only allowed to spread, but in some cases encouraged by the algorithm. What I try to do is try to convince more experts to get involved in these discussions.

[00:16:26] Dr. David Shiffman: I try to reach out to the persuadable people who are saying wrong information, who are maybe well, well intentioned, but not necessarily well informed and say. Hey, it's so great that you care. It's so great that you're trying to help. Um, as an expert, I have some concerns. Are you willing to have a conversation with about it?

[00:16:40] Dr. David Shiffman: And about half the time, they are. I think recent events have shown that it is not good for society to let demonstrably false information stand unchallenged in the public square. So what I have found works okay, is challenge it once, say, that's wrong. Here's how we know it's wrong. Here's what's right.

[00:16:58] Dr. David Shiffman: Here's how we know it's right. Does anyone else have any questions I might persuade other people who are watching who might have thought there's something to it. 

[00:17:07] Jay Flynn: Earlier in my publishing career, I used to go to, uh, a couple of different universities that had library schools and I would talk to students who were getting a master's in library science and you know, the publisher's here to talk about publishing stuff.

[00:17:22] Jay Flynn: You know, I would. Always say every one of you, you're at this great school, every one of you should go take a class in accounting. Every one of you should go take a class in marketing. Should every postdoc. Be forced to take a social media class? 

[00:17:39] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: I mean, I don't think so, but I do think every, any, every aspiring sort of scientist, grad students, postdocs, should get some training in science communication.

[00:17:50] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: I, the reason I say not necessarily social media is because I think there's. Any number of like, ways that they can contribute to the conversation. Yeah. And you know, some people are great at social media, they love doing it, but maybe for someone else it's, you know, going and talking to your local like council members Right.

[00:18:08] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: And you know, like trying to affect policy that way. Maybe it's going to your local, you know, like middle schools. Right. So, so I think some training in science communication, I think I would love to see everyone in science getting that and then also be. Encouraged to reach out and do outreach and engagement.

[00:18:25] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: Just getting, you know, getting that outreach and engagement in whatever way that you are most comfortable with. 

[00:18:33] Dr. David Shiffman: So I, I have often said I don't think it should be required for everyone to do it, but I think everyone should be aware of why it's I, and I think the people who wanna do it should be more supported professionally by academia than they are.

[00:18:46] Dr. David Shiffman: A lot of my colleagues who do this stuff, um, it doesn't count towards traditional, uh, hiring, tenure promotion stuff. It's, they have to do their traditional leadership and service activities, curriculum committee, and then they do this on the side. And this is important service. It should count as leadership and service in academia.

[00:19:04] Dr. David Shiffman: Tenure, hiring and promotion. 

[00:19:06] Jay Flynn: Are there credit? Structures that should be implemented, do you think more widely, uh, around communication. 

[00:19:13] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I mean, that is something that's changed over the last couple decades, particularly at Harvard Medical School, is, you know, an acknowledgement that if you do public education and outreach, not even clinical teaching, that there will be some credit.

[00:19:25] Dr. Marissa Silveri: As a significant supporting activity, um, really acknowledging that wow, there has to be a space. So if you go up for promotion or whatever the next step in the ladder is for you that you're acknowledged as someone who's making contributions. I do think that people should get training in, so, you know, social media or presentations.

[00:19:43] Dr. Marissa Silveri: Now I do not have a social media following. I don't post things. Um, you know, part of that I think bears out from a little bit of fear of. I can share my science, but unless you stay on the, on the track, unless you keep up with it, you post one thing once, you have to keep doing it the whole time. And that feels a little hard for scientists too.

[00:20:05] Dr. Marissa Silveri: It's tricky 

[00:20:06] Jay Flynn: with misinformation, with ai, with, um, you know, changes in funding priorities every four years with, um, you know, the very contentious relationships between political actors and universities. I think it's trite to say that science is at an inflection point. I don't think that captures it. I think it's deeper than that.

[00:20:25] Jay Flynn: But in your opinion, are scientists fighting with one hand behind their back? Shouldn't scientists be joining forces and doing all those things that we just talked about? 

[00:20:37] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: I mean, to me, absolutely. I, I would love to see that. My theory is that both scientists and science journalists too have sort of taken for granted a bit that people care about science and will support it.

[00:20:53] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: And I think that is unfortunately not necessarily still the case. And I think it's up to. You know, not just those of us who are already doing it. So, but everyone else who cares about science and science communication to be sort of making an affirmative case for, for those things. 

[00:21:12] Jay Flynn: So let me ask you, what should publishers be doing more of?

[00:21:15] Jay Flynn: Um, because we have a role or Right. A responsibility, a need, uh, to participate in this discourse differently. 

[00:21:23] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I think engaging the young investigators, the young scientists, because you know, I think there's more of an interest and a willingness and a comfort technologically Yeah. To really, you know, uh, think about these things in a social media presence.

[00:21:38] Dr. Marissa Silveri: And, you know, it's kind of interesting with all the teaching, you know, I do a lot of mentoring and I have learned as much from junior trainees. About where they see science and the importance of sharing it with the public as I've been able to teach about the scientific method. Yeah. Right. So I think that really an acknowledgement continuing to, you know, support junior folks to be able to do both things.

[00:22:03] Dr. Marissa Silveri: This is the next generation of scientists who are gonna continue the work and, you know, letting them know that misinformation is a thing. And how do we avoid it? What are our best practices across the board, and how can we get that information out most effectively? 

[00:22:18] Jay Flynn: We have, as, as a scaled science publisher, we have a, a lot of tools at our disposal.

[00:22:24] Jay Flynn: We're not c creating, um, social media training for young scientists. What is the specific. Tools that you think we ought to be bringing to bear? What would help you in your job? What would help you in your policy advocacy? What would help you in your public outreach that a publisher could do? You get publisher paper with us and what comes after.

[00:22:44] Jay Flynn: And 

[00:22:45] Dr. David Shiffman: a lot of these studies that get so much amazing media attention that a major treatment for a disease or something like that. The I, I don't think I've ever seen a newspaper article about it, say, and this was funded by a taxpayer funded grant. That stuff is usually in the acknowledgement section at the end of a paper that no one other than the author's family reads.

[00:23:05] Dr. David Shiffman: It would be great if when we communicated that's because of taxpayer funded grants. This you love sea turtles. The sea turtle population is rebounding. Because of this paper that was funded by a grant from the Fish and Wildlife Service, the most radical cuts to funding in science are bad, and we shouldn't do them.

[00:23:24] Dr. David Shiffman: There's a step that's, that's not happening. 

[00:23:27] Jay Flynn: Pushing that, helping with, with that narrative, helping draw those links, that's. I can get my arms around that. 

[00:23:34] Dr. Marissa Silveri: Yeah. To add to that too, not only acknowledging these are taxpayer dollars at NIH, you know, this is money that you've helped support. I do think that's a really good point that, you know, letting people know that actually these data belong to you.

[00:23:47] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I think that having a part in where it came from is the important part. Or maybe people will be like, yeah, but I don't agree that that's how I want you to spend my tax dollars on those studies. So it's clearly a very tricky line to balance, 

[00:24:00] Jay Flynn: but like. Are the incentives right? Around sharing, uh, of experimental data of results.

[00:24:07] Dr. David Shiffman: So in global shark conservation research, we have this organization called the IUCN, red Lists. Yeah, yeah. Shark Specialist Group. Yeah. And they do absolutely amazing work with, with data sharing in large scale collaboration. And the way they make it happen is everyone signs this data sharing agreement.

[00:24:25] Dr. David Shiffman: And if you share your data, that's not published yet, but because you want to get it in. To this big report. Everyone else participating knows that they can use it after you are done. 

[00:24:35] Jay Flynn: Yeah, 

[00:24:35] Dr. David Shiffman: and also sometimes they'll reach out to you and say, Hey, colleague from Brazil who doesn't have a lot of experience using this sort of analysis.

[00:24:43] Dr. David Shiffman: Can I help you and be a co-author on the paper with your data? That happens all the time and it's great. And there are, there's a real collaborative model that has been helpful for everyone getting more publications, everyone burning through the data that's otherwise just sitting in a drawer, but also funders like it, that exact problem of someone does a study and then they don't publish it.

[00:25:03] Dr. David Shiffman: Sure. And then they say they're gonna share the data, but they never do is a thing that, uh, private philanthropy funding does not like. 

[00:25:10] Jay Flynn: Right. 

[00:25:11] Dr. David Shiffman: And that the shark specialist group is able to say, look, because of these collaborations, it didn't just generate this report. It generated these ongoing, uh, teams.

[00:25:21] Dr. David Shiffman: It generated these ongoing projects. It generated these 30 other papers that would not have happened otherwise. That helps. 

[00:25:27] Jay Flynn: Do you think it would accrue to the benefit of trust in science? Mm-hmm. If we were transparent about all the stuff that didn't work or all the stuff that. We tried. 

[00:25:38] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I mean, yeah.

[00:25:39] Dr. Marissa Silveri: You're talking about the tip of the iceberg. That's all we see. Right? 

[00:25:41] Jay Flynn: Right. 

[00:25:42] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I mean, the other thing about trying to reconcile the, you know, the null findings from the significant findings is that it's already so much information Yes. To process and manage. Yes. It's exhausting on any level. And if all of a sudden we have to add in, okay, there's all this sophisticated science and here's the findings.

[00:26:00] Dr. Marissa Silveri: Oh, but then there's also all of this that, you know. Was basically not significant. You know, I feel like that's asking the people to do extra work. 

[00:26:10] Jay Flynn: Is there something in that that science communication can learn from? 

[00:26:14] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: I mean, it's, it's interesting because I think, um, one of the things that like, so like you said, it's the tip of the iceberg, but I think knowing the rest of the shape of that iceberg is really important for good science communication and also for good science journalism.

[00:26:31] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: So what invariably ends up happening. In my field is, you know, you'll look at some papers or you look at some press releases and it'll say something, but then it's through the process of reporting that you've talked to enough people in the field, you find you, you get a sense of that shape, right? You know, you, you might ask them, why wasn't this like other things studied?

[00:26:50] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: And some, you know. Somebody knows the answer to that, right? Maybe they did it and it didn't work, or like it was too hard to do, or like the tools didn't exist then and they do now. So there is an answer. So in my field, we get that answer by just talking to enough scientists, right? But if you're a grad student.

[00:27:07] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: You don't have the capability to just call up the entire field and say, and even if you did, you know, who knows if they'd necessarily talk to you again because you're worried about being scooped. So I do think like that information is really valuable and it would be great to have it out there. 

[00:27:22] Dr. David Shiffman: I think we should absolutely also not misrepresent the strength of our argument, because then if we say no, we're absolutely sure it's this.

[00:27:29] Dr. David Shiffman: Trust us, we're experts, and then we learn in 10 years that that's not true. Those people are not going to trust us in the future. 

[00:27:35] Jay Flynn: I do think that. Overexplaining can, can sometimes be a challenge. It can be a barrier, right? The soundbite is often more effective if you're trained in media, you know, you can look better in media, right?

[00:27:50] Jay Flynn: Mm-hmm. Um, coming back to media for a second, the question I ask myself a lot. A couple years ago at New York Academy of Sciences, I sat with a bunch of science journalists and I asked the same question, so I'm gonna ask it to you now. What could improve the relationship between publishers and journalists in science?

[00:28:09] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: I mean, overall, like, I think in general, as you sort of brought up, I mean more transparency, you know, the, the access to sort of, you know, primary like literature, you know, all the supplementary materials. Um, I mean those are sort of. The more information we have, I think the easier it becomes for us to sort of, you know, like make our own assessment of sort of the, the, the science, you know, in a broader sense, you know, like sort of going back to the, the sort of, um, the plain language summaries and any amount of sort of training or like tools for the scientists to sort of like.

[00:28:46] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: Think about when they're publishing, you know, what would sort of the, um, like what could the impact of this be, you know, for, for a general audience, I think would be sort of just getting them even in that mindset I think would be really helpful. 

[00:28:59] Jay Flynn: Okay. Just a lightning round kind of question real quick. Um, in each of your minds, what's the biggest risk if we don't get better at communicating about science?

[00:29:11] Dr. David Shiffman: The people who either don't know what they're talking about or do know what they're talking about and are trying to commit harm are, are not shy about talking about this, and they're very good about doing it in a persuasive way, and if they win, that is bad for everyone. Mm-hmm. 

[00:29:27] Jay Flynn: What do you think 

[00:29:29] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I worry about keeping our finger on the pulse of what's important.

[00:29:33] Dr. Marissa Silveri: To people that if, you know, science bears importance and meaningful discovery is really what's going to ultimately help mental health and wellbeing or just physical health. Um, you know, if we don't stay on top of that and really know what's important, what's on everybody's minds, that, that's kind of my big one place where I'm like, I wanna make sure I know what's important to people at the time.

[00:29:57] Jay Flynn: Okay. What about you? 

[00:29:59] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: Yeah, I worry about losing the public, like, you know, public interest in science, public, you know, like caring about making sure that science is funded. You know, like, like all of the things that sort of, you know, right now, like yes, scientists are al always come up as being highly trusted, but I don't think that we should take that.

[00:30:16] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: You know, there are forces that are actively chipping away at that. And so I don't think we should take that for granted. And I think without good science communication, that is a real risk. 

[00:30:26] Jay Flynn: If you came across a. Super keen graduate student who was also interested in, in writing. Mm-hmm. And, uh, you met him or her and they said, I'm really interested in becoming a science communicator.

[00:30:40] Jay Flynn: Mm-hmm. What's the single best piece of advice you could give him? 

[00:30:43] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: I would say do as much of it as you can in whatever way you. Because I think a lot of the time when I talk to graduate students and a lot of, a lot of grad students reach out and are interested, but they don't know how to get started, or they think, you know, it's sort of like, oh, well how do I, you know, write an article for the New York Times and, you know, it's, it doesn't have to be, you know, starting with an article for the New York Times, right.

[00:31:07] Dr. Sandeep Ravindran: Do an Instagram post about your own research, write a blog post about your own research That's, you know, just any way that speaks to you to sort of like find a way to convey your research or any research's interest you, you know, to an audience that doesn't know that research, I think is a great starting point.

[00:31:25] Dr. Marissa Silveri: I feel like just learning about what options are out there, um, that is something I will pass on to trainees who have never thought about science writing. So it's kind of hearing what's available and what are possibilities and sharing them. Yeah, I think sharing best practices always of like. Yeah. You know, I, I've not been to it, but I heard that this is a really great event.

[00:31:46] Dr. Marissa Silveri: Yeah. And I always tell trainees, always, whenever they go to a scientific meeting, I was like, your job here is to introduce yourself to three people you've never met before. Right. So, whether it's someone who's interest, who's research you really like, or a leader in the field who you're maybe intimidated to talk to, or just someone who might be one of your peers.

[00:32:05] Dr. Marissa Silveri: Always meet three people so that you could walk away from this meeting having made connections. 'cause I think connections are. Really the currency for all of it. 

[00:32:13] Jay Flynn: So great. 

[00:32:14] Dr. David Shiffman: So to add to those excellent pieces of advice, I'd say we, we always tell people, if you wanna be a better writer, read a lot. Right?

[00:32:22] Dr. David Shiffman: Watch people who are good at it and learn from them. And think about not only what is the information contained in those words, but why did they organize the words in those ways? If you were trying to convey this idea, how would you do it? Things like that, what I call active analytical reading. It's a skill I, I try to teach my grad students.

[00:32:38] Dr. David Shiffman: The, the way that I structure this graduate level science communication course is a mix of reading how to guides, produced by journals, produced by professional societies, produced by museums, and then watching people do it. 

[00:32:50] Jay Flynn: Yeah. 

[00:32:50] Dr. David Shiffman: So if you, so there, there's a guide of how to give a good public presentation.

[00:32:55] Dr. David Shiffman: A verbal presentation about science and then go watch five TED Talks. There's a, a guide to how to be interviewed by a journalist. Then go read five or listen to five podcasts and see how they do it. There's a guide to how to write an effective op-ed. Do that. Then read five op-eds and compare where, Hey, this is that thing that it said to do.

[00:33:15] Dr. David Shiffman: They did it really well here. Oh, this is that thing it said not to do. Why did they do that? It undermines the peace. So a mix of, of sort of how to guides and foundational theory and actively observing people doing this well, one thing that people have a real advantage of in getting started in science communication right now, which was not the case when we started, is there's now whole fields of this.

[00:33:36] Dr. David Shiffman: You don't have to reinvent the wheel. There are best practice guides. There are people who've studied what works and what doesn't work, and there are people who've done it successfully who would be delighted to talk to you and offer you advice. So take advantage and. Now stand on the proverbial shoulders of giants.

[00:33:52] Jay Flynn: If I could boil down what I just heard into two things, it's Do it. Right, and ask for help in doing it right. Build your network. Those are great pieces of advice and I think they probably apply more broadly in general, um, in life. So it's, it's, but in terms of network, um, it's always wonderful to build one, um, a small one to build community.

[00:34:15] Jay Flynn: Even if a small one, um, I'm extremely grateful to the three of you for being part of our network today and helping me build some community. It's been amazing. Um, thank you so much for participating in the conversations. I really appreciate it.