Scientist/layperson relations
jstemwedel | April 5, 2008You'll remember that I tried to work out precisely what was being claimed in the premises behind framing set out by Chris Mooney. At the end of this exercise, I was left with the hunch that one's optimal communication strategy -- and how much scientific detail it will require -- might depend an awful lot on what kind of message you're trying to get across to your audience, to the point where trying to generalize about framing doesn't seem very helpful. At least, it's not helpful to me as I'm still trying to understand the strategy.
So, I'm hopeful that those who are hip to the framing thing…
jstemwedel | April 2, 2008Chris Mooney lays out the argument behind "framing". I give my thoughts, item by item.
1. We have long-running politicized science controversies on subjects like evolution and climate change, with separate polarized camps and the repeated use and misuse of complex scientific information in the arguments.
I'm not sure it's fair to characterize the controversies alluded to as "scientific" controversies. It's easier to make a case for scientific disagreement around climate change (at least, in terms of precisely how much human activity contributes, where the tipping point is, what exactly we…
jstemwedel | March 30, 2008In light of all the recent discussion about the "framing" of the Expelled! expulsion, it occurs to me that maybe part of the reason that the argument seems so unproductive is that the parties involved haven't really agreed on what, exactly, they're trying to communicate to the public at large.
Here's my suggestion for a message worth communicating clearly: science isn't politics.
The community of scientists is not like an organized political party. There isn't a Ministry of Information. When things are working as scientists think they should, all the voices are heard -- and each person…
jstemwedel | March 26, 2008For those who have been following the activities of "animal rights" activists, including their attacks of the homes of researchers -- and the reticence of the public in the face of such violent attacks -- a recent Commentary in Biological Psychiatry [1] will be of interest. In it, a number of scientists call on their scientific peers to actively engage in dialogue with the public about what scientific research with animals actually involves and why it is important.
From the commentary:
The attacks are horribly misguided. It is impossible to reconcile the willingness of these terrorists to…
jstemwedel | March 24, 2008Maybe you heard the news that PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins went to a screening of the documentary Expelled! in Minneapolis, except that, because he was recognized, PZ Myers was barred from the screening (despite having signed up ahead of time like the other attendees). Here's the New York Times story, and Greg Laden has collected roughly a bajillion links to blog posts in the aftermath of the incident. The big debate seems to be whether Myers ought to have brought attention to the fact that he was barred from the screening, or whether he should have just gotten a haircut at the mall to pass…
jstemwedel | March 17, 2008Following up on an earlier post, I wanted to say a little about the Synopsis Championship that took place last week. It's sort of a judge's-eye view of the fair -- from a very enthusiastic and impressed judge.
I walked over to the convention center from campus, and it actually took my awhile to find the fair because the last time my teaching schedule was such that I could judge the fair, they held it in the main exhibition hall. This year, it was in its own hangar-like building.
Judges checked in, got their name tags, judging-team assignments, and guidelines for judge and for talking with…
jstemwedel | March 12, 2008A bunch of other bloggers are discussing the recent statement A Broken Pipeline? Flat Funding of the NIH Puts a Generation of Science at Risk (PDF). I thought I'd say something about the complexities of the situation, and about why non-scientists (whose tax dollars support scientific research funded by the NIH and other government agencies) should care.
The general idea behind funding scientific research with public monies is that such research is expected to produce knowledge that will benefit society. There are problems that non-scientists cannot solve on their own, so we pony up the…
jstemwedel | March 6, 2008For readers in the greater San Jose (California) region, I wanted to pass along a call for judges for the Synopsis Championship, scheduled to take place next Wednesday, March 12. Judges will be doing their thing from noon to 4:30 PM at the McEnery Convention Center in downtown San Jose. (Judges will be served a free lunch starting at 11:30, however.) Here are the details on the judging talent they're looking for:
WE ARE STILL IN NEED OF JUDGES especially in Botany, Zoology, Environment Sciences, Heath, Medicine, Gerontology, Microbiology, Biochemistry, and Chemistry. Please consider…
jstemwedel | March 3, 2008A colleague of mine (who has time to read actual printed-on-paper newspapers in the morning) pointed me toward an essay by Andrew Vickers in the New York Times (22 January 2008) wondering why cancer researchers are so unwilling to share their data. Here's Vickers' point of entry to the issue:
[A]s a statistician who designs and analyzes cancer studies, I regularly ask other researchers to provide additional information or raw data. Sometimes I want to use the data to test out a new idea or method of statistical analysis. And knowing exactly what happened in past studies can help me design…
jstemwedel | February 14, 2008You've probably heard that UCLA scientist Edythe London, whose house was earlier vandalized to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars by animal rights activists, has once again been targeted. This time an incendiary device was left on her front door.
Abel and Mark weighed in on this appalling use of tactics to terrorize a scientist doing work on approved protocols -- protocols that had to meet the stringent standards imposed by federal regulations. But while the NIH and the odd newspaper columnist stands up to make the case for animal use in medical research and against the violent…
jstemwedel | February 11, 2008I'm passing on information about a program sponsored by the National Science Foundation for graduate students. The program, organized by the University of Montana Center for Ethics, is called Debating Science 2008, and here's how it's described on the announcement:
We are looking for graduate students who are inspired by their own research, but who are also interested in exploring the social, political, and philosophical context of that work, and who are committed to sharing science with nonscientists, in a genuine hope for a better world...
To solve the toughest problems of the modern…
jstemwedel | January 23, 2008Maybe you saw the story in the New York Times about new research that may show that ingesting too much caffeine while pregnant increases the chances of miscarriage. And, if you're like me, one of the first things you did was try to track down the actual research paper discussed in the newspaper article.
If so, I hope you've had better luck than I have.
The New York Times article (dated January 20 -- that was a Sunday) describes the research as "to be published Monday in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology" and identifies "the lead author of the study" as De-Kun Li. Writing…
Research with vulnerable populations: considering the Bucharest Early Intervention Project (part 2).
jstemwedel | January 11, 2008In an earlier post, I looked at a research study by Nelson et al. [1] on how the cognitive development of young abandoned children in Romania was affected by being raised in institutional versus foster care conditions. Specifically, I examined the explanation the researchers gave to argue that their work was not only scientifically sound but also ethical.
In this post, I examine the accompanying policy forum article, Millum and Emmanuel, "The Ethics of International Research with Abandoned Children" [2]. Millum and Emanuel are in the Department of Bioethics at the Clinical Center of the…
Research with vulnerable populations: considering the Bucharest Early Intervention Project (part 1).
jstemwedel | January 9, 2008The Neurocritic alerted me, in a comment on an earlier post, to a pair of papers in the 21 December 2007 issue of Science that raise some difficult ethical questions about what sorts of research are permissible. Quoth the Neurocritic:
This may be a little off-topic, but I was wondering if you read this article in Science, beginning of abstract pasted below.
In a randomized controlled trial, we compared abandoned children reared in institutions to abandoned children placed in institutions but then moved to foster care. Young children living in institutions were randomly assigned to…
jstemwedel | December 11, 2007I was reading John Timmer's post on Ars Technica about the call for a presidential debate on science and technology and found myself surprised at how many of the commenters on the post think such a debate would be a terrible idea.
It's not just that the commenters think that the presidential candidates would use all their powers to weasel out of taking clear stands that might get them in trouble with one constituency or another. There are quite a few commenters who make variations of this argument:
I don't see this as being a very good idea. These people are POLITICIANS, not scientists. I…
jstemwedel | December 11, 2007In response to one of my science-related questions for the presidential candidates, Drugmonkey points out that the question might not work the way I want it to because of the chasm between science and politics:
"8. If sound scientific research were to demonstrate that one of your policy initiatives couldn't work (or couldn't work without tremendous cost in terms of money, health risk, negative environmental impact, etc.), what would you do?"
This almost, but not quite, hits the fundamental cultural problem between the two societies, science and politics. Your question should be reframed as "…
jstemwedel | December 10, 2007
Science matters. It's hard to make good decisions in today's world that aren't somehow informed by sound science -- especially if you're the head of state of a country like the USA.
This means that it's important to know where the people lined up to get the job of President of the United States stand on science. Those of us deciding how to vote could use this information, and even you folks who are subject to US foreign policy have a significant interest in knowing what you'll be in for.
There ought to be a presidential debate focused on science and technology before the 2008 election. It…
jstemwedel | November 15, 2007The November 5, 2007 issue of Chemical & Engineering News has an editorial by Rudy M. Baum [UPDATE: notbehind a paywall; apparently all the editorials are freely accessible online] looking at the "Google model" for disseminating information.
Baum writes:
I did a Yahoo search on "information wants to be free." The first hit returned was for Wikipedia, the free, collaborative online encyclopedia; according to it, the phrase was first pronounced by Stewart Brand at the first Hackers' Conference in 1984. Brand was quoted as saying: "On the one hand, information wants to be expensive, because…
jstemwedel | November 1, 2007With just over 10 hours left in our ScienceBlogs/Donors Choose Blogger Challenge 2007, it's time to think about what happens next. Supporting classroom teachers with your funds is a noble gesture, but it's just a start.
To really get math and science literacy (and enthusiasm) to the levels we'd like to see, your time and personal involvement can do an awful lot. In this post you'll find ideas from ScienceBloggers about how to turn your good intentions into action.
From Mike Dunford at The Questionable Authority:
There are a lot of children in this country who don't have much in the way of…
jstemwedel | October 25, 2007Like Revere and the folks at The Scientist, I received the series of emails from "ACS insider" questioning the way the American Chemical Society is running its many publications -- and in particular, how compensation of ACS executives (and close ties to the chemical industry) might influence editorial policies at ACS publications.
The ACS disputes the details of the anonymous emails, so I won't have much to say about those. But as an ACS member (who is, at present, participating in an ACS regional meeting), I'd like to ask the Society for some clarity.
Does each member matter to the ACS?…