Allison Sandres - Communicating Science Presentation

Communicating Science The challenge

📄

Allison Sandres

Start

Introduction

In today's technology-driven world, some forms of communication have significantly challenged how scientific knowledge is communicated. While social media platforms allows scientists and other people to share their research and discoveries globally and quickly, they can also create challenges that lead to the distortion, loss of accuracy, and sensationalization of information. Based on information from Vox and The Conversation articles this presentation will explore how social media impacts the integrity of scientific knowledge.

A ´Ḿisinformation Cycle'

Forms of communication, like social media, can make science more accessible and engaging, making it easier for people to understand. However, these ways of communication can also be problematic and bring challenges, as they lead to the spread of misinformation. Many times, social media focuses on engagement, making complex scientific information simpler,more emotional, and less accurate. This creates a loop of misinformation as social media users share and respost oversimplified information.

Sensationalism = Science Exploitation

Scientific information can be disorted in many ways, this can happen through sensationalism. Many times, specifically in news or social media platforms, the language or tone of headlines or titles is exaggerated to attract more views or likes. When it comes to journalists, the complex research and findings are often oversimplified so that they can be more engaging. The downside of this is that information looses its accuracy and people began to either trust the misinformation or be skeptical about it.

Lack of civility in online an social media forums

Social media does not only affect information by disorting it, but also by creating echo chambers. In social media scientific information can lead to polarization, for example discussions and debates on scientific knowledge can change the publics perception on science. Sometimes critical debates can lead people to doubt on new ideas and so they decide to stick and reinforce their already existing beliefs.

Disconnected arrogance of researchers and scientists.

Just like irrespectful debates or discussions can lead to skepticism, science experts who are overly confident on online platforms can also lead to skepticism. Some scientists and researchers show arrogance when they they fail to shows open mindness and engagement with other individuals who may or may not be experts.

'Clear answers to life and social problems'

When people try to simplifly scientific information, like scientific terms, for the audience to understand it 'easier', it can mislead the public. Many journalists who simplify and translate scientific terms, disort the information and their conclusions lose important points, context, and accuracy. Sometimes scientists simplify information that may still be on research, and make it definitive, causing confusions. Challenges also come when information on social media is frequently exaggerated and portrayed as new or surprising. This can lead to misunderstandings of how science evolves. Following this implication, correlation and causation is another one, which leads to the misunderstanding of one thing causing another just because they are associated.

Public understanding of science and the impact of social media

The challenges that social media's sensationalism and misinformation does not just affect science, but other areas of knowledge as well, especially in those that involve complex and evolving information. As a result, reliable information declines and so a broader issue is formed. People feel skeptical about resources, making it harder to understand important knowledge in an accurate way.

Solutions and Upsides

Social media allows people to easily access information, this allows diverse groups of people to learn and engage with scientific information too.

Social media can allow better communication as it enables direct interactions between individuals and the public.

Social media can help people think in a more critical way when looking at scientific information.

Social media can promote fact-checking to prevent misinformation.

In conclusion, social media can be both positive and negative when communicating scientific information. It makes science more accessible globally, but it also quickly spreads misinformation and sensationalism. In order to maintain the integrity of scientific knowledge safe, communication practices and media literacy need to be thoughtful and accurate so that people can navigate science effectively.

📄