What scientists can learn from pandemic communication failures.

Guest post by Caitlin Simopoulos, Joseph Tolsma, and Elisabeth Marnik

Science communication is more important than ever. The world is constantly being updated on scientific data such as newly emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants and results from vaccine clinical trials. With social media at everyone’s fingertips, research is communicated from scientists to the public rapidly, making conspiracy stories hard to separate from the science. Sometimes we read articles in newspapers that make it seem like the media just doesn’t “get it.” As scientists, why do our messages get so lost in translation? And what can we do about it? 

It turns out that scientists think they communicate with the public more often than they actually do. In addition, a study found that scientists may be perceived as competent, but they’re also seen as lacking warmth, leading to being labeled as “untrustworthy.”  Many people who are interested in science rely on information from people they trust, like reporters on the news or friends on social media, where the information isn’t always right.

You may remember the study out of Duke University where the authors presented an affordable and efficient method to test mask efficacy. This study quickly gained popularity for one reason: the unsupported worry that wearing a neck gaiter is worse than wearing no mask at all. Soon after publication, there was an explosion of news articles focusing on the possible problems with wearing neck gaiters as face coverings, leading to the study authors having to clarify their results with the media. 

This type of miscommunication isn’t isolated. Misleading and unclear communication surrounding the AstraZeneca/Oxford coronavirus vaccine has led to delays in vaccine rollouts and low confidence in the efficacy of the vaccine. Detroit Mayor Mike Duggun publicly declined the Johnson & Johnson vaccine allotment for his city, citing unsupported claims that other vaccines are superior.  

Even outside of the pandemic, science communication fails. For example, the conversation around climate change has been dubbed the “largest science communication failure in history.” A recent poll of Americans shows that only 17% of study participants believe that climate scientists have concluded that global warming is human-caused. Understanding how to be an effective communicator is an important part of a scientist’s job. 

Don’t get too discouraged. We can work to improve communicating our science to the public. One of the best ways to improve your own science communication is by watching others who are doing it well. The core goal of scientific communication is to equip people with fact-based information that will help them make informed decisions. But facts alone aren’t enough; there must be a narrative to engage the audience  For example, this article from journalist Shannon Hall details the state of Arctic sea ice, new discoveries about marine life during winter months, and the importance of new data for climate models. However, the story being told focuses on the lives of the research team while isolated in the Arctic for months. The story itself is interspersed with dramatic images from the Arctic darkness. This piece also emphasizes the passion that the researchers have for their work in a way that facts alone could not. In short, it demonstrates that scientists care, and it encourages the reader to care as well. 

Of course, we don’t always have the advantage of dramatic footage and polar bears on our front porch. We can still let our personalities shine through—that can even help with your perceived trustworthiness! Together, Siouxie Wiles and Toby Morris created a number of playful graphics that communicated the importance of physical distancing during the Covid-19 pandemic and helped explain the ongoing research. These viral cartoons avoid jargon while telling a story of how and why various preventive measures are important…all while encouraging the reader to “keep up with your own slice of cheese”.

Keep in mind that science communication within your sphere of influence takes time. Trust takes time to earn and begins with developing a relationship with your audience. Extend your own trust to the public that is trying to learn, and don’t be afraid to admit errors! The audience we reach won’t necessarily be the same for all of us. For example well-known science communicators Katie Mack and Katherine Hayhoe don’t reach the exact same audience. However, both use their genuine personalities to resonate with an audience with which they find some common ground, building trust over time. Go out and find your niche!

Here are some tips for talking to the public that will help you get your message across effectively: 

1. Prune down your concepts: Often scientists want to show how much work they did to get to a particular finding. This may be appropriate when giving your dissertation defense or a talk to experts in your field, but this will lead to losing your audience if you’re talking to the public. When talking to a general audience make sure you focus on only the core findings fundamental to your work. If possible, only have one or two main takeaway points and avoid mentioning things that are not related and can be taken out of context. 

2. Keep it short: Research shows that 20 minutes is the perfect length for a talk that won’t lose the audience’s attention. This is why TED talks are 18 minutes long. So, when possible, keep your talks to the public shorter, and perhaps use the extra time to answer questions and interact with the audience directly. 

3. Know your audience: Tailor your talk specifically to those you are talking to. If you’re meeting with a group of fourth graders make sure you check with parents and teachers of that age group to remember what things are reasonable for them to know and understand. If you’re talking to adults who are non-scientists, don’t be tempted to throw in jargon just because they’re older. It is better to simplify concepts as much as possible to ensure you’re not losing your audience. If you’re talking to a group with a specific common interest, for example, young students who want to be scientists, relate the topics to them and why they should care. 

4. Use analogies and stories: When possible, make the topic personal by incorporating stories from your own life or stories related to the concepts being discussed. When explaining difficult concepts, use analogies that relate the concepts to things people are exposed to more often. 

5. Make it interactive: Those of us who teach know that the education world is abuzz with active learning. Students learn better by being active participants in the process. This is also true for talks. If you make your talk interactive the audience members are less likely to sneak peeks at their phone or lose interest. Some great ways of incorporating interactive elements are to ask a question and have audience members spend a minute or two talking to the people next to them. You can also take polls through a show of hands or phone polling apps. Other great interactive tips can be found here!

Ultimately, the best talks to the public are ones where the scientist is having fun while talking. Their excitement over the topic comes through. So, make sure you allow your passion about the topic to shine, and don’t be afraid to infuse your personality. You are the expert, you just need to distill your knowledge in a way that is understandable.

About the authors:

Caitlin Simopoulos is a Postdoctoral Associate at the University of Ottawa who studies the gut microbiome through computational biology. She also aspires to make science accessible to everyone. Connect with Caitlin via email, or on Twitter.

Joseph Tolsma is a graduate student at North Carolina State University who studies plant gravitropism and the circadian clock using time course imaging and RNA sequencing. He is passionate about engaging undergraduates in accessible research that results in real progress. You can contact him via email at jsjoseph@ncsu.edu. 

Elisabeth Marnik is an Assistant Professor at Husson University. Marnik is a member of the GSA’s Conference Childcare Committee and a past member and current advisor of the GSA Early Career Leadership Program’s Communication and Outreach Subcommittee. You can find Elisabeth on instagram, FB or twitter.

After giving a talk in Seattle about chromosome pairing, Chao-ting (Ting) Wu boarded the redeye flight back to Boston and settled in to read a new research paper on an odd new discovery in the human genome. “It was so exciting, I had to get up and walk around on the plane,” she says. “I could not stay in my seat.”

The paper that had Wu pacing the aisle that day was the first report describing DNA sequences called ultraconserved elements (UCEs), from Gill Bejerano in David Haussler’s group at UC Santa Cruz. UCEs are nucleotide sequences more than 200 nucleotides long that are identical in the human, rat, and mouse genomes. It’s incredibly unlikely that a sequence that long could remain unchanged over hundreds of millions of years of evolution, and yet Bejerano reported finding 481 of them.

“I remember reading it and thinking, how can that be?” Wu says. “How could we have missed this? How can something be so important and so hidden?”

Intrigued, Wu began studying UCEs in her own lab. “They are considered by some to be the longest-standing mystery of the genome era,” she says. “We don’t have an explanation for why any genome would retain even one sequence that long. The reason my lab studies it is this: pairing could be a very simple explanation.”

Wu has spent decades studying how homologous chromosomes pair up. Once considered a quirk of Drosophila’s genome, the idea that chromosomes communicate by coming into contact with each other is now being studied in mammals, fungi, and even plants. “It’s moved from being an ‘artifact’ to possibly being a universal way in which homologous chromosomes can communicate,” Wu says. “That’s been extremely exciting to see.”

Wu’s studies began when she was a graduate student with William Gelbart, who was a professor at Harvard University and a previous awardee of the George W. Beadle Award, and continued in her own laboratory with Jim Morris, a graduate student and now a professor at Brandeis University, and Pam Geyer, a professor at the University of Iowa. These studies focused on transvection, in which gene expression can be regulated by interactions between homologous alleles on different chromosomes. If the basis of UCEs is pairing, she speculates, that could explain why the sequences cannot tolerate changes.

This model aligns two otherwise incongruous observations. First, she and Adnan Derti, a graduate student and now at Auron Therapeutics, discovered that copy number variation of a UCE – a deletion or duplication – is rarely found in healthy individuals. On the other hand, other groups found that some UCEs can be deleted from both chromosomes without causing lethality in mice. The pairing model, however, predicts exactly such outcomes for UCEs whose function is to pair.

Perhaps these perfectly conserved regions act as “guardians of the genome,” she speculates, helping preserve the integrity of the full set of chromosomes. Understanding them could ultimately provide protection from disease.

“She’s always thinking about the weird and the wonderful, and what are the things we have no idea about,” says Jack Bateman, a former postdoc who studied transvection and now heads his own lab at Bowdoin College. “She’s so fun to talk to because she just has these ideas that are different.”

In addition to her work as professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School, she directs the Consortium for Space Genetics and the Personal Genetics Education Project (pgEd), a public engagement program intended to empower citizens to educate themselves about the genomic technologies that pervade our modern society. This team of scientists, social scientists, educators, and community organizers work with schools, teachers, policymakers, filmmakers, communities of faith, and other groups to prompt conversations about the benefits and ethical and social implications of genetics.

For all of these diverse contributions, Ting Wu has been awarded the 2021 George W. Beadle Award from the Genetics Society of America, which recognizes individuals who have made outstanding contributions to the community of genetics researchers beyond an exemplary research career. 

“She’s so passionate about things,” says Pamela Geyer, professor of biochemistry at the University of Iowa, one of the scientists who nominated Wu for the award. “She pushes you to think about things in a different way.”

At some point thinking becomes experimenting, and, eventually, time came to get a good look at the chromosomes, themselves. Thanks to work done in Wu’s lab, geneticists have powerful tools to visualize the 3D shapes of chromosomes and trace the dynamic system as they interact.

This story begins with Ben Williams, a graduate student and now with Helmsley Charitable Trust, whose idea for Oligopaints was demonstrated and then advanced by Brian Beliveau, a graduate student and now an assistant professor at the University of Washington,­ and Eric Joyce, a postdoctoral fellow and now an assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania. Oligopaints are low-cost fluorescent probes that hybridize to specific locations along the chromosomes and, led by Beliveau, the Wu group and her collaborators, Peng Yin and Xiaowei Zhuang, professors at Harvard Medcial School and Harvard University, respectively, enabled Oligopaints to image chromosomes in super-resolution. “It’s been very exciting,” says Wu. “The super-resolution structures are giving us true measurements of distance, volume, and shape, and we are now looking at greater and greater expanses of the genome. We’re seeing how completely dynamic the genome can be.” 

The infectious enthusiasm that has propelled her lab into uncharted scientific waters has also spilled over into the realm of education. The advent of home genetic testing and personal genomics sparked lots of probing conversations among her lab members about communicating with the public about the social and ethical considerations around advances in genetics.

“Have we communicated enough with everybody, non-scientists, about genetics?” Wu muses. “So that when these technologies come out, they are informed enough to make decisions for themselves about whether they want to use those technologies?”

To learn what questions were percolating through the community, she and her husband, geneticist George Church, and their daughter, Marie, took a road trip across the country to talk to people who had volunteered their DNA for the Personal Genome Project. “These were people from all walks of life,” Wu says. “We came back so much more enriched by their conversations and so much more knowledgeable about the challenges that we had to address.”

That trip sparked her to co-found the Personal Genetics Education Project, or pgEd, with Bateman and Dana Waring, who is the Education Director. The program started by visiting local high schools and making presentations in biology classrooms. Realizing that they wouldn’t get too far just visiting individual schools, the team began publishing curriculum and teacher training materials to spread genetics education into more classrooms, particularly those where students might not have a strong background in genetics or biology. But Wu emphasizes that the goal isn’t to teach the nuts and bolts of DNA, or recruit students into STEM careers. Rather, she says, pgEd seeks to spark curiosity and debate, such that when students encounter genetic technology in their lives, they feel qualified to ask questions. 

“We’re not talking about what DNA bases are,” she says. “We’re talking about interesting things people might want to know to help them navigate their lives. When people are interested, they start asking questions. We’re hoping that when a physician comes along and says, ‘we’re going to do this DNA test,’ they aren’t silent, thinking, ‘oh, this person knows a lot more than I do.’ Instead, they will feel confident enough to ask questions, and I think that is the greatest protection you can give somebody. Laws are helpful, but one-on-one in a doctor’s office, you need the confidence that you can hold your own in a conversation about genetics. That’s what we’re going for.”

pgEd, whose activities are coordinated by Marnie Gelbart, Director of Programs, has spread well beyond schools into TV and film, congressional briefings, and faith communities. Recently, Gelbart, Robin Bowman (Professional Development Associate), and Nadine Vincentin (Research Fellow) worked on the public engagement programming and educational resources that accompanied the Ken Burns PBS documentary “The Gene: An Intimate History.” They have also been working closely with The Learning Center for the Deaf on lessons and curricula in American Sign Language, with Mohammed Hannan (Community Liaison) extending their engagement within communities. “It’s been amazing to see it grow,” says Bateman. “They’ve done so many things. They’ve done congressional briefings. How do these things happen? They happen because it’s Ting.”

The George W. Beadle Award honors individuals who have made outstanding contributions to the community of genetics researchers. Wu will accept the award at the 62^nd Annual Drosophila Research Conference (#Dros21) and will present an Award Seminar online on April 29^th from 1-2 pm EDT.

Interested in learning about public engagement from pgEd? GSA has partnered with pgEd for a program on inclusive public engagement for geneticists. Sign up now for the “Discussing Genetics” webinar series and join us for additional training workshops coming soon. 

FlyBoard is pleased to offer funding to five outreach programs, which aim to increase early career scientist participation, equity, and diversity in the Drosophila research community.

Amos Abolaji, Drosophila Research and Training Centre
The Drosophila Research and Training Centre (DRTC) is a not-for-profit and non-political organization based in Ibadan, Oyo, Nigeria. It facilitates the use of Drosophila melanogaster as a cost-effective, alternative model for biomedical research and teaching in Sub-Saharan African countries. As part of its Drosophila for Schools initiative, DRTC will work with 10 public and private secondary schools in Ibadan to introduce students to Drosophila research. Researchers will visit the schools to discuss the importance of fly research and demonstrate fly handling and microscopy, and two students from each school will then visit the DRTC for further training.

Dotun Adeyinka, Science Education for Youngsters 
Science Education for Youngsters (SEFY) is a registered non-governmental and non-profit organization working to create science-awareness in Nigeria. In collaboration with Osun State University, SEFY will organize an event for 50 secondary school students in Osogbo, Nigeria to introduce the Drosophila model system, demonstrate lab equipment, and carry out hands-on training using Foldscope microscopes.

Eric Hastie, Discovering Drosophila Development
Discovering Drosophila Development is a summer research experience for undergraduates, which will be held at UNC-Chapel Hill (UNC-CH) in collaboration with Durham Technical Community College (DTCC). About 10-15  DTCC students will be trained in multiple scientific techniques to conduct student-driven discovery with unknown outcomes including: meeting and collaborating with scientists in UNC-CH Drosophila labs, learning fly culture and maintenance, researching literature to develop hypotheses, and using microscopy and antibody labelling. The goal of the program is to create micropublications via microPublication Biology and to encourage DTCC students to transfer to UNC.

Stephen Klusza, Genomics Education Partnership 
The Genomics Education Partnership (GEP) is a 140+ faculty collective that provides undergraduate students with bioinformatic CUREs on manual gene annotation in multiple Drosophila fruit fly species. As part of a global initiative to increase accessibility and diversity retention, GEP is working to translate their “Understanding Eukaryotic Genes” modules on manual gene annotation for undergraduates from English to Spanish. They are also creating accompanying Spanish-language videos. These new materials will be a first step to recruiting and retaining English as a Second Language students in Drosophila research across all postsecondary institutions.

Alana O’Reilly, eCLOSE Institute
The eCLOSE Institute will host a one-week summer camp program that introduces biomedical research to students in Philadelphia, more than 60% of whom are under-represented minorities. Due to Covid-19, the current hybrid format will ship students a “lab in a box” that they use to investigate the influence of diet on Drosophila development, guided by online instructors. The program aims to increase students’ research literacy, providing them with an understanding of what a research career is and technical and conceptual foundations for continuation in science.

The Genetics Society of America (GSA) and the Personal Genetics Education Project (pgEd) of Harvard Medical School announce a new partnership to build public dialogue about genetic technologies. Their joint program aims to better equip scientists to engage in discussions about genetics with all communities, with special emphasis on those who have been marginalized, economically disadvantaged, or otherwise excluded from conversations about science.

“In this time of reckoning with racial injustice and health inequality, geneticists have a responsibility to engage with the public on the ethical and social dimensions of their work. Indeed, many of our members want to take part in these efforts, but they are unsure of how best to do so,” says GSA’s Executive Director, Tracey DePellegrin. “We are thrilled that pgEd is offering its guidance and experience to help our researchers achieve more inclusive education and public engagement.”

Genetic technologies are transforming healthcare and society. A person may seek out genetic testing to inform their medical care or fertility treatment; or to explore their ancestry. They may encounter issues related to genetics during interactions with law enforcement, criminal justice, and immigration authorities; or when voting on proposed uses of genetic technologies (for example, to address vector-borne disease). There is a need for scientists to work with communities so people are equipped with the information they want about genetics. And science, too, benefits from the experiences and perspectives of the communities we serve.

The new partnership responds to this need by mobilizing scientists to engage in two-way conversations with the public on the benefits and ethical, legal, and social implications of genetics. It also aims to help researchers better understand the experiences and perspectives of a diverse range of stakeholders and how they are affected by genetic research and technology. “In pgEd’s travels, we have shared what is happening in genetics with countless communities. And what we have learned from the people we’ve met could fill volumes. Our team is eager for the opportunity to share our experiences with the GSA and to learn from the work of others in the genetics community.” said pgEd Director of Programs and geneticist, Marnie Gelbart.

The program will launch with a series of online workshops for scientists to increase their awareness of the ethical and social dimensions of genetics and build skills for public engagement. These events will explore topics from the pgEd curriculum, such as precision medicine, genome editing and the environment, and the history of eugenics. pgEd will share approaches for illustrating how genetics has propelled new medical treatments and welcoming many viewpoints on the use of new technologies, such as CRISPR. Interactive discussions will address pgEd’s experiences engaging with a range of communities and will include guests from pgEd’s community partnerships.

GSA and pgEd aim also to build public engagement internship and fellowship programs. These offerings will be shaped by input from workshop participants and each component will center around creating ways for scientists to engage meaningfully with their communities — whether personal or professional.

This initiative will build upon the strengths of the two partner organizations. Since 2006, the pgEd team has been talking with people from many walks of life about genetics through a respectful, inclusive, and non-advocacy approach. Along with their expertise in creating online curricula (including 11 lessons that accompany the 2020 PBS documentary, The Gene: An Intimate History), pgEd will draw on their breadth of programs—including a series of six Congressional briefings in Washington, DC, training thousands of teachers, partnering with communities of faith, and working with creators of television and film.

Founded in 1931, GSA is a scientific membership society for researchers and educators in the field of genetics. Using the tools of genetics and genomics, nearly 6,000 GSA members from more than 50 countries around the world investigate a wide variety of biological questions and applications. Partnering with pgEd will help GSA scientists to build bridges between the research community and public groups—particularly those who normally feel excluded from scientific discussions.

This project will launch at 12:00 p.m. EST, December 8, 2020, with an online event titled “Meeting the Moment: How can scientists contribute to a broad conversation on genetics and society?” Participants will:

• Learn about pgEd’s approach to engaging with communities and addressing controversial and/or sensitive topics such as reproductive genetic testing, eugenics, DNA testing in law enforcement, race and ancestry, and genome editing and the environment;
• Discuss common challenges and barriers in communicating about the scientific, ethical, and social dimensions of genetics;
• Help shape the topics and goals of the 2021 workshop series and future initiatives by providing input and asking questions.

Speakers:

• Denise Montell, GSA President
• Ting Wu, pgEd Director and Co-founder
• Marnie Gelbart, pgEd Director of Programs

All members of the GSA community are invited to participate by registering at the link below.

Register Now

About GSA:

The Genetics Society of America serves an international community of more than 5,000 scientists who use genetics to make new discoveries and improve lives. GSA advances the field through conferences, the journals GENETICS and G3: Genes|Genomes|Genetics, advocacy, professional development programs, and more.

About pgEd:

Founded in 2006 in the Department of Genetics at Harvard Medical School, pgEd is a team of scientists, social scientists, educators, and community organizers, who talk with people about genetics in every way that it touches our lives – from health to the workplace and from the environment to the criminal justice system.