tag:theconversation.com,2011:/global/topics/communication-skills-18655/articlesCommunication skills – The Conversation2024-02-19T13:43:19Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2218502024-02-19T13:43:19Z2024-02-19T13:43:19ZHow having conversations with children builds their language — and strengthens family connections<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576189/original/file-20240216-16-eufedv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C7321%2C3396&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Intentionally integrating vocabulary into conversations from topics children are curious about helps grow children's language skills. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Parents and caregivers of school-aged children are all too familiar with the after-school conversation that sounds a little something like: </p>
<p>“How was school?” </p>
<p>“Fine.” </p>
<p>“What did you learn?” </p>
<p>“Nothing.”</p>
<p>Conversations between children of <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-new-study-of-warlpiri-language-shows-how-baby-talk-helps-little-kids-learn-to-speak-207835">all ages</a> and attentive, caring adults <a href="https://www.hanen.org/helpful-info/articles/power-turn-taking.aspx">offer strong benefits</a> in all domains of children’s <a href="https://www.apa.org/topics/parenting/helping-kids">well-being</a>.</p>
<p>When these conversations are purposeful and strategic, they can even strengthen skills that contribute to <a href="https://www.readingrockets.org/topics/vocabulary/articles/talking-counts#">stronger literacy and language development</a>.</p>
<h2>More than information exchange</h2>
<p>When we engage in quality conversations with children, we are doing more than finding out how their day was at school. </p>
<p>Talking with children <a href="https://decoda.ca/talking-is-teaching/">teaches them about their world</a>, <a href="https://www.lena.org/new-research-links-early-vocabulary-skills-to-teacher-child-interaction-in-preschool-classrooms/">enhances their vocabulary</a>, <a href="https://www.integrativemind.com/blog/strengthening-parent-child-communication-building-trust-and-understanding">strengthens trust and relationships</a> and models formal <a href="https://thesixshifts.com/2021/08/2035/">language structures</a> — how an arrangement and order of <a href="https://surreyschoolsone.ca/teachers/literacy/elementary/reading-essentials/language-structures/#">words in the context of specific sentences yields meaning</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A man and girl seated at different ends of a couch with mugs." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576070/original/file-20240215-22-te0oax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576070/original/file-20240215-22-te0oax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576070/original/file-20240215-22-te0oax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576070/original/file-20240215-22-te0oax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576070/original/file-20240215-22-te0oax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576070/original/file-20240215-22-te0oax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576070/original/file-20240215-22-te0oax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Quality conversations have multiple benefits.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The power of conversations between children and adults even has the potential to affect connectivity in select regions of the brain. </p>
<p>In a recent study in the <em>Journal of Neuroscience</em>, conversational “turns” — where there is a back-and-forth conversational exchange between children and attentive adults — were linked to increased strength of white matter connections between regions of the brain <a href="https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1034-22.2023">related to speech and comprehension of written and spoken language.</a> </p>
<h2>Sparking language-building conversations</h2>
<p>The list below details some ways parents or caregivers can spark language-building conversations that accelerate children’s literacy and family relationships:</p>
<p><strong>Actively listen.</strong> <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/parents/essentials/toddlersandpreschoolers/communication/activelistening.html#">Active listening</a> involves showing an authentic interest in what children have to say. Active listening looks like minimizing distractions, making eye contact, stopping other things you are doing, lowering yourself to their physical level (by sitting or bending down, for instance) and reflecting or repeating back what they are saying and what they may be feeling to make sure you understand. </p>
<p><strong>Ask open-ended questions.</strong> Open-ended questions encourage children to <a href="https://decoda.ca/talking-is-teaching/">pause, think and reflect</a> instead of simply responding “yes” or “no” or “nothing.” Open-ended questions typically begin with the following words and phrases: </p>
<ul>
<li>Why, how, describe … </li>
<li>Tell me about …</li>
<li>What do you think about … </li>
<li>I wonder (if / why / how) …</li>
<li>What do you notice about … </li>
<li>Tell me more about …</li>
<li>What else do you want me to know about that? </li>
</ul>
<p>Open-ended questions can also be used as follow-ups to other questions.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two adults sitting on a porch with a child." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576190/original/file-20240216-24-pejfg0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576190/original/file-20240216-24-pejfg0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576190/original/file-20240216-24-pejfg0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576190/original/file-20240216-24-pejfg0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576190/original/file-20240216-24-pejfg0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=556&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576190/original/file-20240216-24-pejfg0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=556&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576190/original/file-20240216-24-pejfg0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=556&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Asking children what they notice is one way to guide an open-ended conversation.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>Try the “Strive-for-Five” framework.</strong> “Strive-for-Five” is a conversational framework pioneered by educators David Dickinson and Ann B. Morse and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.2266">recently adapted by</a> educational researchers Sonia Q. Cabell and Tricia A. Zucker. This <a href="https://coursemedia.erikson.edu/eriksononline/CPC/2014_2015/Module1/Documents/Purposeful_Talk/Strive_for_Five_Experience.pdf">framework is intended</a> to enhance conversations by encouraging parents, caregivers and educators to strive for <em>five</em> conversational turns with children instead of the typical three in order to foster foundational language skill development. To try this, respond to children in a way that challenges their thinking and encourages using language. Rather than stopping short at the third conversational point, attempt to continue the conversation by asking fun, <a href="https://www.parents.com/parenting/better-parenting/advice/questions-every-parent-should-ask-their-kid/">open-ended follow-up questions</a> or share another thought to try to extend the exchange.</p>
<p><strong>Embed conversations in everyday routines.</strong> If you find it difficult to actively listen and engage in purposeful conversations during certain times of the day, try to schedule time where active listening may be more feasible, like during <a href="https://www.naeyc.org/our-work/families/spending-quality-time-with-your-child#:%7E:text=Create%20a%20special%20ritual%20for,how%20she%20makes%20you%20feel">everyday routines</a> or when <a href="https://laughplayread.wordpress.com/2018/04/09/strive-for-five/">reading aloud</a>. </p>
<p><strong>Scaffold the conversation.</strong> Scaffolding is a strategy used to support learning by building on skills children already have and gradually reducing the support provided. Scaffolding conversations with children might include:</p>
<ul>
<li>repeating words or phrases so they are used correctly;</li>
<li>integrating vocabulary from topics they are learning about or are curious about;</li>
<li>providing sentence starters that invite them to finish the sentence;</li>
<li>asking questions that challenge their thinking to move a conversation past the third talking turn.<br></li>
</ul>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rVaRdVt6Ihw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Video from Parent Lab discusses how scaffolding conversations with children strengthens language-building skills, autonomy, confidence and connections.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Engaging in frequent, meaningful conversations with children of all ages helps strengthen their <a href="https://www.readingrockets.org/topics/about-reading/articles/simple-view-reading">language comprehension</a>, and in turn, reading comprehension. </p>
<p>Elevating the quality of conversations by using any or all of these suggestions has the potential to enhance the fundamental components of language comprehension, while simultaneously building and maintaining family connections.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/221850/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kimberly Hillier does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Engaging in purposeful, meaningful and strategic conversations with children can directly support children’s language comprehension, an important component of reading.Kimberly Hillier, Instructor, Faculty of Education, University of WindsorLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1806692022-04-08T04:22:45Z2022-04-08T04:22:45Z‘I know that you know’ – 5 ways to help people with aphasia to communicate<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/457046/original/file-20220408-25034-j3hdvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=50%2C10%2C6659%2C4456&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://image.shutterstock.com/image-photo/senior-couple-together-their-kitchen-600w-1961845216.jpg">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Aphasia was in the news last week when the family of actor Bruce Willis <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-aphasia-the-condition-bruce-willis-lives-with-180399">announced</a> he was stepping back from his career due to communication difficulties. Also last week, performer Lady Gaga was <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniesoteriou/lady-gaga-liza-minnelli-oscars">praised</a> for her supportive approach to co-presenting an Oscar with Hollywood great Liza Minnelli, who has previously battled encephalitis and expressed confusion about what to say onstage. </p>
<p>People living with aphasia say lack of <a href="http://www.aphasiapathway.com.au/?name=community-awareness">awareness</a> of the condition is one of the biggest barriers they face. Two high-profile examples of communication difficulties – one of them involving an aphasia diagnosis and one featuring similar symptoms – present an opportunity.</p>
<p>Aphasia is the <a href="https://aphasia.org.au/about-aphasia/">loss of access to language</a> due to brain damage, most commonly following stroke but also caused by traumatic brain injury, tumours and a type of dementia called <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35352609/">primary progressive aphasia</a>. It is a frustrating and isolating condition, derailing conversations and impacting relationships with family and friends. </p>
<p>But there are ways to help those we love to communicate. Here are five ideas to keep in mind: </p>
<h2>1. Acknowledge capacity</h2>
<p>Aphasia affects language, not intellect. Aura Kagan from Canada’s <a href="https://www.aphasia.ca/">Aphasia Institute</a> coined the <a href="http://library.avemaria.edu/title/supported-conversation-for-aphasia-adults-i-know-you-know/oclc/462970127">phrase</a> “I know that you know”. This was a breath of fresh air for people who were used to being treated as lacking capacity because they couldn’t find the words to express themselves. </p>
<p>Acknowledging that <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27681063/">people with aphasia remain competent</a> and intelligent lays the groundwork for productive and respectful exchanges.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1463969453578854414"}"></div></p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-brain-regions-control-our-language-and-how-do-we-know-this-63318">What brain regions control our language? And how do we know this?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>2. Partner up</h2>
<p>Recognise the responsibility for satisfying conversations does not just rest with the speaker. It is equally shared by those communicating with them. <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27117383/">Evidence</a> shows that when communication partners are given information, strategies and a little practice, they can enable much <a href="https://extendstore.ucl.ac.uk/product?catalog=UCLXBCA">better conversations</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.aphasia.com/aphasia-resource-library/aphasia-treatments/supported-conversation-for-adults-with-aphasia-sca/">Communication partner training</a> is now commonly offered by speech pathologists. It is also being <a href="https://pilotfeasibilitystudies.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40814-019-0398-5">explored</a> for use with people who have dementia.</p>
<p>Key strategies in communication partner training include:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>speaking with your usual tone and volume</p></li>
<li><p>acknowledging communication blocks or problems and trying to respectfully repair them, rather than ignoring them</p></li>
<li><p>writing down key words to keep chat on track </p></li>
<li><p>drawing or using gestures – say, pointing to an object or person</p></li>
<li><p>using yes/no questions to confirm meaning</p></li>
<li><p>summing up what’s been said at regular points in the conversation. </p></li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-aphasia-the-condition-bruce-willis-lives-with-180399">What is aphasia, the condition Bruce Willis lives with?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>3. Respect the human right to communicate</h2>
<p>Communication is an essential and integral part of being human. We express our personalities, histories, aspirations and achievements through spoken or written language. Communication is <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29143547/">recognised as a human right</a>, and without it, life quality suffers. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02687038.2018.1494817">Humanising our approach</a> to aphasia – that is, attending to subtle and empathetic human needs, not just the basics of survival – has the potential to sustain and validate the person with aphasia and to transform health services.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1508380858096492553"}"></div></p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/in-a-chatty-world-losing-your-speech-can-be-alienating-but-theres-help-121943">In a chatty world, losing your speech can be alienating. But there's help</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>4. Ensure accessibility</h2>
<p>Everything we do is mediated by language: reading the news, using public transport, buying a coffee, using a smart phone, chatting with colleagues or friends over lunch, negotiating bureaucracy, buying a ticket for a sports or music event. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02687030444000499">Accessibility</a> is about ensuring that how language is spoken, written or presented electronically does not exclude people with communication difficulties. Adjustments might moderate the speed, presentation or complexity of information. </p>
<p>Just as people who use wheelchairs should be able to expect ramp access instead of facing a flight of stairs, people with aphasia should be entitled to a communication ramp (another brilliant term from Aura Kagan) where a person or agency makes their verbal or written information <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tammy-Hoffmann/publication/254222116_Exploring_the_use_of_graphics_in_written_health_information_for_people_with_aphasia/links/0c9605202201f99898000000/Exploring-the-use-of-graphics-in-written-health-information-for-people-with-aphasia.pdf">aphasia-friendly</a>. This may be particularly vital in <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09638288.2020.1722264">health-care contexts</a>. </p>
<h2>5. Include people in conversations and events</h2>
<p>Inclusion is what keeps people buoyant and gives them opportunities to practice and improve their communication. Aphasia can be a lonely disorder but with communication supports, positive attitudes, friendship, meaningful activity, community aphasia groups and social opportunities, it doesn’t have to be. Don’t leave people out because you assume they might feel uncomfortable. Offer choices and they will tell you.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/457041/original/file-20220408-22-x3xtvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="four adults chatting at an outdoor gathering" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/457041/original/file-20220408-22-x3xtvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/457041/original/file-20220408-22-x3xtvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457041/original/file-20220408-22-x3xtvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457041/original/file-20220408-22-x3xtvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457041/original/file-20220408-22-x3xtvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457041/original/file-20220408-22-x3xtvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457041/original/file-20220408-22-x3xtvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Make sure you include people with aphasia in social events.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1628891892235-5d834f9c64c1?ixlib=rb-1.2.1&ixid=MnwxMjA3fDB8MHxwaG90by1wYWdlfHx8fGVufDB8fHx8&auto=format&fit=crop&w=2070&q=80">Unsplash/Leah Hettering</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Awareness of aphasia is key. Despite being relatively common, the word aphasia is not well known, and it is hard to address something when you <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27384070/">don’t have a word for it</a>. Knowing the term helps but knowing how to help is even better.</p>
<p>You can find more information on aphasia, conversation partner training and community aphasia conversation groups <a href="https://aphasia.org.au/">online</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/180669/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Deborah Hersh is a member of research teams that receive funding from the NHMRC. She volunteers as chairperson of the not-for-profit Australian Aphasia Association and is an affiliate of the CRE Aphasia Recovery and Rehabilitation. </span></em></p>Aphasia is loss of language following brain damage. Conversation partners can help them say what they want to say.Deborah Hersh, Professor, Speech Pathology, Curtin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1657542021-08-24T20:04:48Z2021-08-24T20:04:48ZCommunication is changing — and most universities haven’t kept up<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/415068/original/file-20210807-90251-9bv24g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5381%2C3530&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/5QgIuuBxKwM">Headway/Unsplash</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Almost everyone can agree <a href="https://myfuture.edu.au/career-articles/details/what-are-employability-skills">communication is important</a>. There is much less agreement about what, exactly, communication is or how best to develop skills in it.</p>
<p>Communication today is more multi-modal than ever, but we still tend to give and receive the most <a href="https://theconversation.com/5-tips-on-writing-better-university-assignments-130541">training in writing</a>. Our national survey of introductory communications courses in 2020, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2021.1964049">just published</a> in the journal Communication Research and Practice, found more than 70% of assignments in the sample evaluated only a single communication mode. Perhaps unsurprisingly, 85.7% of these were in written form. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/5-tips-on-writing-better-university-assignments-130541">5 tips on writing better university assignments</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Less than a third of the assessment pieces were multi-modal. And only 11% enabled students to practise their spoken, written and visual communication skills in an integrated way.</p>
<p>While writing is certainly a critical communication skill, it’s not the only one. We make and receive messages in spoken or visual form every day. We sometimes seem to believe just by using these modes we’ll naturally get better at them over time.</p>
<p>Sadly, anyone who’s sat through a typical PowerPoint presentation or unending Zoom meetings knows even senior professionals and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/aug/03/politics-rides-roughshod-over-substance-as-scott-morrison-tries-to-spin-his-way-out-of-covid-corner">heads of government</a> often are unaware of or ignore best practices for crafting an effective message in written, spoken or visual form. </p>
<p>And with these three modes being increasingly bundled together, it’s time to stop studying them in isolation. We need to start learning how to thoughtfully integrate them.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/in-a-world-of-digital-bystanders-the-challenge-is-for-all-of-us-to-design-engaging-online-education-147195">In a world of digital bystanders the challenge is for all of us to design engaging online education</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A growing field but writing dominates</h2>
<p>Universities are a prime training ground for students to learn what communication is. It’s here they should be able to hone communication skills in all its forms before entering the workforce. Despite this, universities have a long history of privileging the written word over other communication types. </p>
<p>English departments, for example, have existed for more than 250 years but not until 1974 did Australia’s <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15358593.2013.867069">first communication degree</a> enter the scene. Interest in communication has grown since then – <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2021.1964049">86% of Australian universities</a> now offer a degree in this field.</p>
<p>However, the ways communication is defined and taught vary widely across the country. In part, this reflects the diversity of where communication degrees are housed. They can be found everywhere from faculties of arts to education, social science, law, business and even health.</p>
<p>Our survey of first-year undergraduate courses found class sizes ranged from as few as 16 students to as many as 1,000 or more. The average was 343. </p>
<p>Such large classes make it hard to achieve consistency across the large teaching teams required to staff these units.</p>
<p>The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced new challenges and increased existing ones related to catering to students from potentially many time zones. In our survey, 20% of universities did not provide synchronous tutorials, where students and teaching staff meet in real time.</p>
<p>Asynchronous learning opportunities, where learners and teachers aren’t meeting in real time, can be convenient for students. However, they don’t allow them to hone the dynamics of real-time conversation and communication. </p>
<p>When assessment tasks are pre-recorded or pre-prepared, are we modelling real-world communication to our students?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/digital-learning-is-real-world-learning-thats-why-blended-on-campus-and-online-study-is-best-163002">Digital learning is real-world learning. That's why blended on-campus and online study is best</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1322613148382384130"}"></div></p>
<h2>The challenges of holistic communications teaching</h2>
<p>Another challenge relates to the background and skills of the teaching team. More than half the universities surveyed had only a single lecturer for the unit. Expecting one person to be able to adequately support the very different modes of written, spoken and visual communication is unrealistic. </p>
<p>A co-taught lecturing approach might better position these programs to define and teach communication more holistically. Our survey found the most popular way to support learning was through student group work. This team-based approach mirrors how much of the professional workforce operates and deserves a closer look. </p>
<p>Shrinking university budgets and <a href="https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/media-item/17000-uni-jobs-lost-to-covid-19/">reduced teaching teams</a> mean much of the work of providing feedback in large units is relegated to group work and peer critique. This can be valuable but shouldn’t substitute for expert feedback.</p>
<p>Encouragingly, unit co-ordinators surveyed are keen to experiment with more innovative assessment types and to consider communication more holistically. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-the-point-of-assessment-in-higher-education-anyway-32095">What is the point of assessment in higher education anyway?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>To achieve these goals, significant barriers need to be navigated. These include: </p>
<p>1) the length of the semester or degree program, as only so much can fit into a few months and Australia’s degrees are shorter than those in the United States</p>
<p>2) the disciplinary background of the teaching team</p>
<p>3) workload and marking considerations</p>
<p>4) university bureaucracy, as universities sometimes require a year or more to make changes to how classes are taught, which doesn’t encourage innovation and allow co-ordinators to be nimble.</p>
<p>In this age of lockdowns and remote working, being able to present a message in written, spoken and visual forms is more critical than ever. We need holistic training in all three modes so we can become more effective, empowered and responsible communicators.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/165754/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>T.J. Thomson receives funding from Australian Research Council through Discovery project DP210100859: Amplifying Voices from the Royal Commission into Aged Care and from the Australian Academy of the Humanities.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Glen Thomas and Lesley Irvine do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>We live in a world of spoken, visual and written communication, but the third mode continues to dominate teaching and assessment in university communication courses.T.J. Thomson, Senior Lecturer in Visual Communication & Media, Queensland University of TechnologyGlen Thomas, Senior Lecturer in Professional Communication, Queensland University of TechnologyLesley Irvine, Lecturer in Strategic Speech Communication, Queensland University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1462672020-09-21T12:16:14Z2020-09-21T12:16:14ZScientists don’t share their findings for fun – they want their research to make a difference<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358725/original/file-20200917-18-b3vrzz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=136%2C0%2C4210%2C3132&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Scientists talk about their research because they want their expertise to guide real-world decisions.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/caltech-seismologist-egill-hauksson-speaks-to-reporters-at-news-photo/1154154444">Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/research-brief-83231">Research Brief</a> is a short take about interesting academic work.</em></p>
<h2>The big idea</h2>
<p>Scientists don’t take time away from their research to share their expertise with journalists, policymakers and everyone else just to let us know about neat scientific facts.</p>
<p>They share findings from their research because they want leaders and the public to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520950671">use their hard-won insights to make evidence-based decisions</a> about policy and personal issues. That’s according to two surveys of Canadian and American researchers my colleagues <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=0ssM57wAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">and I</a> conducted.</p>
<p>Scientists from both countries reported “ensuring that policymakers use scientific evidence” is at the top of their list of communication goals. Helping their fellow citizens make better personal decisions also scores high. Further, scientists say they’re not communicating just to burnish their own reputation.</p>
<p><iframe id="cXAyd" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/cXAyd/6/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Why it matters</h2>
<p>In just one recent week, American President Donald Trump said top health scientists were <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/16/world/covid-coronavirus.html">making “a mistake” about the value of masks</a> in slowing COVID-19 transmission and that he doesn’t “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/14/us/politics/trump-biden-climate-change-fires.html">think science knows</a>” whether climate change is part of the reason the American West is beset by wildfires this summer.</p>
<p>The scientific community has come to expect this sort of historically unusual <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe7391">disregard for scientific advice</a> from the current administration. But our new study underscores that scientists prioritize sharing their research so it can have an impact in the real world. They aren’t satisfied just producing knowledge for knowledge’s sake, but rather want it to inform such matters as pandemic response and wildfire management.</p>
<p>We know from other interviews and surveys that many scientists will often initially indicate that their communication “goal” is simply to increase knowledge or correct misinformation. However, if prodded by questions like “But why do you want to increase knowledge?” or “What do you hope will happen if you correct misinformation?” they will often identify their ultimate aim as helping people make better decisions.</p>
<p>Highly trained scientists <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547018786561">seem especially willing</a> to share what they’ve learned if they think it can help society make smarter choices. For example, forest scientists I’ve worked with in New England want to help land managers and policymakers find ways to <a href="https://harvardforest.fas.harvard.edu/other-tags/wildlands-woodlands">protect Northeastern forests from urban sprawl and other threats</a>. There also appears to be broad demand among scientists of all types <a href="https://www.aaas.org/programs/science-technology-policy-fellowships">to take part in</a> <a href="https://ritaallen.org/stories/report-calls-for-strengthening-science-engagement-fellowships-through-new-connections-and-inclusion/">policy fellowships</a> that help them connect with policymakers on issues like managing health and environmental risks.</p>
<p>Science isn’t infallible, but the premise of scientific research is that it’s among the best available ways of trying to understand a complicated world. Years of survey research also show that Americans have more <a href="https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20207/public-attitudes-about-s-t-in-general#figureCtr1095">confidence in scientists</a> than in most other groups in society and want scientists to be <a href="https://wayback.archive-it.org/5902/20170708080854/https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c7/c7s3.htm#s4">involved in a range of different types of decision-making</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358726/original/file-20200917-24-1l2plgo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Woman and child look at X-ray with pediatrician" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358726/original/file-20200917-24-1l2plgo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358726/original/file-20200917-24-1l2plgo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358726/original/file-20200917-24-1l2plgo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358726/original/file-20200917-24-1l2plgo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358726/original/file-20200917-24-1l2plgo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358726/original/file-20200917-24-1l2plgo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358726/original/file-20200917-24-1l2plgo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Scientists want their research to inform decisions like those made by families and health care providers.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/pediatrician-shows-x-ray-to-concerned-parent-royalty-free-image/807902904">SDI Productions/E+ via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What still isn’t known</h2>
<p>Our surveys didn’t ask about every possible goal. For example, we did not ask scientists about how much they aim to push policymakers to adopt specific laws or regulations. We also didn’t investigate how much effort scientists put into the goal of learning from those with whom they communicate, which might have implications for what they choose to research.</p>
<p>Another thing that’s missing from our research is direct information about what might lead scientists to prioritize specific goals.</p>
<p>However, we do know from past research that scientists are more likely to say they’re <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547018786561">willing to communicate</a>, as well as to prioritize <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728478">specific objectives</a> or <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224039">tactics</a>, if they see a choice as ethical, able to make a difference and within their capacity.</p>
<h2>What’s next</h2>
<p>My colleagues and I continue to study scientists’ communication goals and overall views about communication. We’re especially interested in understanding how scientists identify their goals and how to encourage them to draw on evidence-based strategies that could help them achieve those goals. This increasingly includes efforts to encourage scientists to collaborate with communication experts <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-03-2020-0022">within their organizations</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146267/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John C. Besley receives or has received funding from the National Science Foundation (AISL 1421214-1421723), the United States Department of Agriculture (MICL02468), the Albert and Mary Lasker Foundation, the John Templeton Foundation, the Rita Allen Foundation, the David & Lucile Packard Foundation, and the Kavli Foundation for research related to this article. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of these organizations.</span></em></p>A survey of over a thousand scientists reveals that their goal when communicating about their work is to help the rest of us make evidence-based decisions that draw on scientific findings.John C. Besley, Ellis N. Brandt Professor of Public Relations, Michigan State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1368882020-05-11T14:13:18Z2020-05-11T14:13:18ZWhy aren’t people in Accra better prepared for floods? The key is in communication<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/330978/original/file-20200428-110742-t73zal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Rains regularly displace thousands in Africa. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Vadim Petrakov/Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Floods are the second most prevalent and devastating natural disasters in sub-Saharan Africa. Between <a href="https://cred.be/sites/default/files/CredCrunch56.pdf">2000 and 2019</a> floods accounted for 64% of all disaster events in the region. They affected the livelihoods of about 53 million people and killed more than 14,000. Sierra Leone, Ghana, Nigeria, Gabon, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Mozambique were hit severely over this period. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.undrr.org/implementing-sendai-framework/what-sf">Policies</a> and strategies to confront the increasing flood <a href="https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/app.20170066">frequency</a> and deaths on the continent are on international, regional and national agendas. Most of these documents acknowledge that information is an important resource for flood preparedness. The recent <a href="http://media.ifrc.org/ifrc/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2018/10/B-WDR-2018-EN-LR.pdf#66">World Disaster Report</a>, for example, states that the impact of floods has reduced in some parts of the world because the general public obtained useful information about the risk and acted on it. </p>
<p>Mass information campaigns through radio, TV, newspapers, audio vans and weather reports have been <a href="https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/services/Download/uon:34372/ATTACHMENT01">ramped up</a> globally in the past decade to improve flood disaster awareness. Such efforts are premised on the <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1088/0963-6625/2/4/003">idea</a> that people’s ability to prepare depends on getting the right information about the flood. They need to know – in clear language, at the right time – what might happen and when, and what they can do.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, it appears that <a href="https://gar.undrr.org/sites/default/files/reports/2019-05/full_gar_report.pdf">efforts</a> in flood risk communication haven’t always helped the general public to prepare better. </p>
<p>Ghana’s government conducts flood education campaigns annually before the rainy season. But in the country’s flood-prone informal settlements, where about <a href="https://theconversation.com/accras-informal-settlements-are-easing-the-citys-urban-housing-crisis-104266">62%</a> of the urban population reside, floods still have devastating consequences. In one of the most recent floods in the Greater Accra region in June 2015, one-third of the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420919305977#bib67">152</a> fatalities were within or around informal settlements.</p>
<h2>The research</h2>
<p>Our <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212420919305977?via%3Dihub">study</a> set out to investigate the effect of community participation in strengthening the relationship between disaster risk information dissemination and disaster preparedness. We chose three flood-prone communities (Old Fadama, Nima and Kotobabi) in Accra, Ghana’s capital city. We developed a model to test whether communities prepared better for flood disasters when they have been involved in communicating information. The study was undertaken a few months after the June 2015 disaster.</p>
<p>Our study showed that information that is accessible, comprehensive, and tailored to the needs of flood-prone populations strongly influences intentions to prepare. But this is only when city authorities make it possible for the public to get clarity and support to act on the information. </p>
<p>This insight shows how disaster management professionals and policy makers can integrate the cultural, social and value systems of a community into the communication process. Risk should be clearly communicated in languages that are understood locally and information must be channeled through traditional and community institutions. </p>
<h2>Flooding in Accra</h2>
<p>When people <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2413-8851/1/2/13">move to Accra</a>, they usually start by living in an informal settlement. Most of these areas are <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0042098016686526">flood-prone</a> because houses are built on flood plains with non-durable materials. </p>
<p>The government carries out educational campaigns on radio, TV and other media through the National Disaster Management Organisation, Ghana Meteorological Agency and National Commission for Civic Education. These campaigns talk about the type of hazard, areas to be affected, potential damage and in some cases preventive measures. But they don’t involve the active participation of the public. </p>
<p>There’s a need to revisit this one-way information flow, and instead encourage dialogue between experts and the public. This could happen when public authorities build a good relationship with communities. A sustained relationship builds trust. This could in turn give communities the confidence to share experiences of their response to floods.</p>
<p>Our study results showed that providing flood information to the public instigates discussions among community members but has little impact on preventive action. It’s more persuasive when the public is actively engaged in discussions with experts on flood risk preparedness. This should be on transparent and open platforms where experts readily address people’s doubts and uncertainties. </p>
<p>The study revealed that regular engagement between experts and the public is an opportunity to clarify messages, seek additional information and build trust. This can influence positive behavioural changes in terms of flood preparedness. </p>
<h2>Participatory disaster risk communication</h2>
<p>The risk of <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/05/SR15_SPM_version_report_LR.pdf">climate-related disasters worldwide</a> is growing, especially in developing regions. To build local resilience, disaster management experts and policymakers must make community participation the core element of risk communication to the public.</p>
<p>Our study showed that the level of community participation matters when it comes to disaster preparedness. When people get information in an engaging and interactive manner, their behaviour changes in positive ways. As one respondent quipped: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Give me more information but also seek my views and experiences; then I will act. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The public shouldn’t just receive information but take an active part in what is communicated and how, so that it is useful in their local circumstances.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/136888/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Seth Asare Okyere is part of the Osaka University - Univerity College London (UCL) international joint research project on Freetown, funded by the Osaka University Global Knowledge Partnership (GKP) Program</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kim Maund, Matthew Abunyewah, and Thayaparan Gajendran do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Communities prepare better for flood disasters when they have been actively involved in communicating information.Matthew Abunyewah, Sessional lecturer, School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of NewcastleKim Maund, Discipline Head – Construction Management, School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of NewcastleSeth Asare Okyere, Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka UniversityThayaparan Gajendran, Associate Professor, School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1362142020-04-16T12:18:57Z2020-04-16T12:18:57ZLeading in wartime: 5 ways CEOs should communicate with their workers during coronavirus<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/328105/original/file-20200415-153326-vsp2k3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=309%2C316%2C4492%2C2843&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Microsoft's Satya Nadella urged his employees to show empathy for one another.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Elaine Thompson</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-coronavirus-task-force-economic-public-health-steps/story?id=69646672">President Donald Trump</a> and <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/06/chief-surgeon-at-top-ny-hospital-likens-this-week-of-coronavirus-outbreak-to-war.html">others</a> have likened the coronavirus pandemic to fighting a war. </p>
<p>As <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=697eQncAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">someone who studies how leaders communicate</a>, I believe that’s an apt description. But the president isn’t the only general in this battle. America’s CEOs also have important leadership roles to play as the crisis poses a test of their ability to help their workers not only endure and stay healthy but keep them motivated and engaged as well. </p>
<p>What’s the best way to do that? </p>
<p>To find an answer, I reviewed <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/home/Temporary/CEO%20Communication%20Literature">21 academic studies</a>
on executive leadership communication and conducted a textual analysis of <a href="https://instituteforpr.org/covid-19-resources-for-pr-professionals/">12 industry studies</a> related to <a href="https://www.ickollectif.com/covid-19">organizational and leadership communication</a> during the pandemic.</p>
<p>I discovered five key themes that may provide some insights for how CEOs should communicate with their employees during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>
<h2>1. Be transparent</h2>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.04.012">Transparency</a> requires leaders to openly and proactively share relevant information to employees in a timely, frequent and digestible manner; give accurate information regarding what is happening, what the impact is and how the company is handling it; and offer clear guidance on what workers should be doing. </p>
<p>It also means encouraging employees to speak up and share their feedback and concerns. This kind of openness <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.04.012">fosters trust</a>and reduces uncertainty – especially important in a <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2013.795869">crisis</a>. </p>
<p>In a video message to the employees, <a href="https://www.inc.com/jason-aten/marriotts-ceo-shared-a-video-with-his-team-its-a-powerful-lesson-in-leading-during-a-crisis.html">Marriott CEO Arne Sorenson</a> demonstrated this when he didn’t try to sugarcoat the losses his company has suffered in the crisis.</p>
<h2>2. Convey authenticity</h2>
<p>Authentic leadership is not a new concept to the business community and its effectiveness in generating positive employee outcomes has been supported by a bulk of <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1177/0093650215613137">academic</a> and industry <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2014.908720">research</a>. </p>
<p>While CEOs are wired to take action, tough times like the pandemic cast monumental challenges to leading an organization. In an era where uncertainties outweigh the certainties, sometimes they simply don’t know what to do. </p>
<p>That’s okay. CEOs that authentically share vulnerability can actually demonstrate the human side of leadership. Employees look up to leaders for assurance and support. They do not necessarily expect CEOs to be superheroes. </p>
<p>To communicate in an authentic manner, CEOs should stay true to their values and beliefs and keep their promises. They need to also be self-aware of what they’re capable of, and genuine in their communication with employees – even when they don’t know what’s going on. </p>
<p>Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, <a href="https://blog.aboutamazon.com/company-news/a-message-from-our-ceo-and-founder">exhibited this trait</a> when he acknowledged to employees, “There is no instruction manual for how to feel at a time like this,” and added his own list of worries, such as the safety of his family and colleagues. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/328441/original/file-20200416-192749-1ldy9r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/328441/original/file-20200416-192749-1ldy9r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/328441/original/file-20200416-192749-1ldy9r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/328441/original/file-20200416-192749-1ldy9r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/328441/original/file-20200416-192749-1ldy9r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/328441/original/file-20200416-192749-1ldy9r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/328441/original/file-20200416-192749-1ldy9r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos conveyed authenticity in his letter to employees.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>3. Show empathy</h2>
<p>The value of empathy was perhaps the most recurring theme in my analysis of best practices.</p>
<p>In my own <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.04.012">recent study</a> that examined leadership communication during a planned organizational change – such as a merger – I found that communicating with empathy enhanced employee trust and drove commitment and acceptance to that change. </p>
<p>The COVID-19 pandemic poses similar challenges because employees face enormous uncertainties and unpleasant emotions, such as fear, sadness, anxiety and frustration. CEOs can help reduce worker anxiety and form a bond with them by <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1108/01437730610692425/full/html">showing sympathy</a> and standing in their shoes. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/coming-together-combat-covid-19-satya-nadella/">Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella</a> demonstrated this and emphasized the value of empathy in his message to employees, urging them to show “understanding for each other’s situations.”</p>
<h2>4. Put people first</h2>
<p>The novel coronavirus is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/14/business/economy/coronavirus-corporate-earnings-stocks.html">hammering companies’ bottom lines</a>, from productivity to profits. CEOs that put employees’ safety and health first are demonstrating their humanity. </p>
<p>This people-centered mindset is crucial for the organization’s survival and long-term development as employees are the backbone of the organization and eventually create the organization’s <a href="http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/15905241/breakthrough-organization-performance-competitive-advantage-through-employee-centered-management">competitive advantage</a>.</p>
<p>We have seen many examples of this during the current crisis, such as the CEOs of Bank of America, Citigroup, FedEx and Visa <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2020/03/27/prominent-ceos-promise-that-they-will-not-layoff-workers-in-2020/#f613cd9a61d5">pledging not to lay off any workers</a> as a result of the pandemic.</p>
<h2>5. Demonstrate optimism</h2>
<p>Conveying positivity or optimism is an especially important leadership quality during challenging times, when it is easy for people to experience negative feelings and frustrations. Leaders who portray an optimistic outlook in the tone of their communications and foster positive thinking motivate and inspire employees. </p>
<p>A good example of this is Levi Strauss CEO Chip Bergh, who <a href="https://sourcingjournal.com/denim/denim-business/levi-chip-bergh-coronavirus-heritage-denim-employees-201735/">wrote a letter to employees</a> encouraging them to focus on the crisis’ silver lining. </p>
<p>“One of the things motivating me through this difficult time is the idea that we can learn and adapt and adjust so we emerge stronger as a result of this test,” he wrote. The crisis “will pass. We will get through this together and be a better and stronger company as a result of it.”</p>
<p>And at my own school, University of Florida <a href="https://gatorswire.usatoday.com/2020/03/11/university-of-florida-president-kent-fuchs-issues-statement-on-covid-19/">President Kent Fuchs</a> reminded students and staff of their “tradition of pulling together and rising to meet major challenges with optimism and determination.”</p>
<p>During extraordinary times like the COVID-19 pandemic, leaders need effective communication skills like these to instill trust, confidence and hope in their workers – essential ingredients to winning the war. </p>
<p>[<em>You need to understand the coronavirus pandemic, and we can help.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=upper-coronavirus-help">Read The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/136214/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rita Men does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A scholar of how leaders communicate offers five key traits CEOs should use when communicating with their workers about coronavirus.Rita Men, Associate Professor of Public Relations, University of FloridaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1343622020-03-30T12:15:47Z2020-03-30T12:15:47Z4 tips for staying connected during coronavirus, from migrants who live far from family<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323391/original/file-20200326-132985-19tp4xx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=16%2C16%2C5447%2C3620&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">For immigrants like Juana, from El Salvador, migration -- not coronavirus -- is the main cause of separation from family. Norwalk, Connecticut, March 25, 2020.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/undocumented-immigrant-juana-from-el-salvador-looks-from-news-photo/1214779312?adppopup=true">John Moore/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As social distancing and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-stay-at-home-order.html">shelter-in-place orders</a> are implemented to curb the spread of coronavirus, ever more people worldwide are separated from relatives, friends and loved ones. As of March 29, an estimated <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-stay-at-home-order.html">229 million Americans</a>, <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/coronavirus-has-italy-lockdown-what-rest-us-have-look-forward-n1155396">60 million Italians</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2020/mar/25/modi-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-to-save-india-video">1.3 billion Indians</a> have been asked to stay home.</p>
<p>Forced separation, while new to most, is a fact of life for the world’s <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/psp.2165">migrants</a>. Still, many sustain close relationships with relatives through years, even decades, of physical distance.</p>
<p>As a <a href="https://www.umass.edu/anthro/people/lynnette-arnold">linguistic anthropologist interested in the power of everyday language</a>, I study how such families maintain relationships by analyzing recordings of their conversations. I worked with migrant families living stretched between El Salvador and the United States to record 75 hours of these conversations over four months. </p>
<p>I’ve identified four communication strategies of long-distance families that may help people in coronavirus-related isolation cope with physical separation and maintain social connection.</p>
<h2>1. Nothing beats a good phone call</h2>
<p>As <a href="https://www.aithority.com/video/zoom-downloads-increase-1270-from-employers-working-from-home/">millions more people</a> rely on video-conferencing technology, they’re discovering what migrant families have long known: Video communication can be draining – physically, mentally and emotionally. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323388/original/file-20200326-132969-132jzj7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=35%2C17%2C4000%2C2640&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323388/original/file-20200326-132969-132jzj7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323388/original/file-20200326-132969-132jzj7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323388/original/file-20200326-132969-132jzj7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323388/original/file-20200326-132969-132jzj7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323388/original/file-20200326-132969-132jzj7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323388/original/file-20200326-132969-132jzj7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A couple on coronavirus-related lockdown uses videochat, Turin, March 22, 2020.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/people-talk-on-a-video-call-from-a-smartphone-at-home-after-news-photo/1214094422?adppopup=true">Stefano Guidi/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For work-related video conferencing, the challenges include preparing yourself and your immediate surroundings for broadcast. For families, studies show, seeing those you love on video <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1367877912452486">can make feelings of separation more intense</a>, increasing the yearning to be together. </p>
<p>Text messages and other written communication, on the other hand, <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1461444810393903">can feel too impersonal</a> and may not be accessible to those – like young children – who can’t read, or to people with visual impairments.</p>
<p>That’s why the families in my research rely on phone calls for almost all of their communication. Calls are intimate. Hearing a loved one’s voice can convey emotions without the constant visual reminders of separation.</p>
<h2>2. Communicate to connect</h2>
<p>Communication isn’t just about conveying information – it’s also a <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01459740.2020.1717490?scroll=top&needAccess=true">way of caring for others</a>. The long-distance families I study use small acts of communication to reinforce their intimate bonds. </p>
<p>Take greetings, for instance. In the phone calls I have analyzed, greetings almost always sound something like this: “I send greetings to you, to my grandchildren, to my daughter-in-law and to all those who surround you.” </p>
<p>Such elaborated greetings articulate family relationships that stretch across space. They are an instance of the everyday <a href="https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/ritual-communication-9781847882950/">ritual that linguistic anthropologists have shown to be powerful communicative tools</a> in societies around the world. </p>
<p>As migrant families speak these greetings over and over, in every conversation, they continually create and re-create connections despite distance. That’s because communication has <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/43102167?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents">consequences beyond the moment</a> in which it happens. Research shows that migrant families are <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01459740.2018.1532424">aware of how the effects of conversations accumulate</a> over time.</p>
<h2>3) Manage conflict carefully</h2>
<p>These long-distance relatives have also developed strategies for communicating about conflict, which is inevitable in any family, and minimizing its consequences.</p>
<p>By and large, the conversations I analyzed avoid explicit disagreement and signal concerns in subtle ways. </p>
<p>For instance, if relatives in El Salvador don’t have enough money to cover their day-to-day costs, they embed indirect complaints as they recount family news. A story of their father’s visit to the doctor, for instance, will include a quote from him lamenting that he cannot afford his new prescription. </p>
<p>This communication strategy puts family problems on the table for discussion without placing blame. </p>
<h2>4) Celebrate the past – and a future together</h2>
<p>Communication has the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0271530907000067">ability to span not just distance but time</a>. </p>
<p>The migrant families I study often reminisce about times when they lived together, recalling humorous incidents or past mishaps that lead to shared laughter. This isn’t just nostalgia: Separated relatives leverage these shared memories to imagine what it might be like to live together again. </p>
<p>For example, two sisters talk about how they once shared household tasks, using these memories to imagine a scenario in which the migrant sister could play with the young niece she’s never met. </p>
<p>The future is uncertain for migrant families. Many hope and plan to be together again, but restrictive immigration policies often <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/663575?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents">prevent relatives from reuniting or even visiting each other</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323393/original/file-20200326-132974-1jmltme.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323393/original/file-20200326-132974-1jmltme.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323393/original/file-20200326-132974-1jmltme.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323393/original/file-20200326-132974-1jmltme.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323393/original/file-20200326-132974-1jmltme.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323393/original/file-20200326-132974-1jmltme.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323393/original/file-20200326-132974-1jmltme.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323393/original/file-20200326-132974-1jmltme.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A Salvadoran migrant hugs a friend she fears she may never see again, at El Buen Pastor Methodist Church, Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, June 12, 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/yolanda-amigrant-from-el-salvador-unsure-if-she-will-get-news-photo/1150824310?adppopup=true">Paul Ratje/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For those locked down by coronavirus, the isolation should end in weeks or months. In the meantime, thoughtful communication can help sustain long-distance relationships. </p>
<p>And even after this crisis passes, I hope these lessons from migrant families will continue to enrich conversation and deepen social connections.</p>
<p>[<em>Insight, in your inbox each day.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=insight">You can get it with The Conversation’s email newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/134362/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lynnette Arnold does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>What international families can teach the rest of us about sustaining long-distance relationships.Lynnette Arnold, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, UMass AmherstLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1135932019-05-07T11:27:10Z2019-05-07T11:27:10ZEmpathy in healthcare is finally making a comeback<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271178/original/file-20190426-194603-gr50m4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/confirm/126288149?src=Qk8W7sKnUL8jh4D7Plq1yQ-1-2&size=medium_jpg">michaeljung/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A doctor friend – let’s call her Anne – was teaching three smart medical students who were told to diagnose a woman complaining of nonspecific pain and anxiety. After 20 minutes of questions, the students wrote seven pages of notes and recommended two drugs: a painkiller and an antidepressant. Anne considered the students’ analysis and agreed that it was based on sound medical evidence. But something told her there was more to the story. </p>
<p>She sat beside the patient, asked general questions and listened carefully. After a few minutes, the woman broke down in tears and told her about a personal tragedy involving a family member. After some comforting, the woman’s tears, shoulder pain and anxiety went away. Anne’s dose of empathy cured the woman, without the need of resorting to drugs. This is an important consideration, given that even relatively mild painkillers may <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.i20.long">contribute to the opioid crisis</a> as some patients subsequently seek stronger and stronger drugs.</p>
<p>The high value now placed on good empathic communication in medicine is relatively new. Until the 1970s, the doctor-patient relationship was often paternalistic. An anxious patient was less likely to be given a shoulder to cry on and more likely to be given a prescription for Valium (“mother’s little helper”). </p>
<p>In the best enactment of the paternalistic doctor, the fictional surgeon Sir Lancelot Spratt, in the 1969-70 British TV series Doctors in the House, tells a patient who has become distressed at being diagnosed with a serious tumour: “This is nothing whatsoever to do with you.” Colleagues tell me that the scene is an accurate depiction of how things were. At that time, there was little if any communication skills training. Many doctors believed it was an innate skill that <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4500973/#R2">could not be taught</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oVWjAeAa52o?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Doctors in the House.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>This article is part of Conversation Insights</strong></em></p>
<p><em>The Conversation’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/introducing-conversation-insights-a-new-team-that-seeks-scoops-from-interdisciplinary-research-107119">Insights team</a> generates long-form journalism derived from interdisciplinary research. The team is working with academics from different backgrounds who have been engaged in projects aimed at tackling societal and scientific challenges. In generating these narratives we hope to bring areas of interdisciplinary research to a wider audience.</em></p>
<p><em>You can read more Insights stories <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/insights-series-71218">here</a>.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>The 1980s saw a change, with the General Medical Council (which set standards for medical doctors in the UK) <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1679819/?page=1">requiring that communication skills – including empathy – be taught</a> to medical students, and growing recognition in the field that it is an important skill to have. </p>
<p>By the 1990s, communication skills teaching had become a staple of medical school and continuing medical education in the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8468764">US</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1760608">Canada</a> and the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18275414">UK</a>. And within the domain of communication skills, <a href="https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2016/10/14/jeffrey-aronson-when-i-use-a-word-a-word-about-empathy/">empathy was emerging as a key component</a>.</p>
<p>Certainly, the current focus on good communication hasn’t made the problem of “<a href="https://www.bmj.com/too-much-medicine">too much medicine</a>” go away. But promoting empathic communication as a therapeutic agent makes it more likely that people who can do without potentially harmful drugs, like tranquillisers and opioids, don’t get them.</p>
<h2>Measuring the effects</h2>
<p>We’ve recently <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0141076818769477">quantified the effects of therapeutic empathy</a> the same way drug effects are quantified. More and more carefully controlled trials are comparing what happens with healthcare practitioners who practice empathic, positive communication (being <a href="http://www.caremeasure.org/">positive is a part of empathy</a>), with those who carry on as usual. The results are overwhelmingly encouraging, with empathic and positive communication improving conditions ranging from <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17451796">lung function</a> and <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265005989_Effectiveness_of_psychological_support_based_on_positive_suggestion_with_the_ventilated_patient">length of hospital stay</a>, to <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22323376">pain</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20506122">patient satisfaction</a> and <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5223324/">quality of life</a>. There is even evidence that it makes the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2720820/">common cold go away</a> faster.</p>
<p>From related research, we also understand more about how positive empathic communication works. First, you need empathy in order to make a correct diagnosis. Without it, patients may not share symptoms, especially embarrassing ones.</p>
<p>Next, an empathic doctor will help put a patient at ease and reduce their stress. Dozens of trials suggest that relaxation reduces <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/204946371000400105">pain</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25574576">depression and anxiety</a> and even <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15942415">lowers the risk of heart disease</a>.</p>
<p>Being positive also activates the patient’s brain in such a way that the patient makes his or her own painkilling endorphins. Empathic positive communication also increases patient <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26009529">satisfaction</a>. Satisfaction, in turn, is correlated with <a href="https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/3/1/e001570">safer and better health outcomes</a>. </p>
<p>By contrast, unfriendly doctors are less likely to get enough information from patients to make the right diagnoses or prescribe the right treatment. One study even showed that unempathic doctors could cause <a href="http://www.bmj.com/content/316/7148/1878">harm</a> by scaring patients away from medical care when they need it.</p>
<p>Like all studies, our review had limitations. For example, the studies in the review were small and mostly “unblinded”. A blind trial is one where the researchers or participants – or both (double-blind) – don’t know which treatment they are getting. Blinding is hard to achieve as doctors know if they have been trained to provide more empathy. </p>
<p>Another limitation is that the effect was small. For example, empathic and positive communication reduced pain by an average of half a point on a ten-point scale. However, this small effect is important, especially if we take harms and drug options into account.</p>
<p>Many commonly used over-the-counter drugs, on the other hand, barely outperform placebos for <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26863524">back pain</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28700091">cancer pain</a> and many <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26068955">chronic conditions</a>, yet they can have serious side effects. By contrast, a key finding of the study was that positive empathic communication does not seem to harm patients.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271181/original/file-20190426-194600-h87jxy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271181/original/file-20190426-194600-h87jxy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271181/original/file-20190426-194600-h87jxy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271181/original/file-20190426-194600-h87jxy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271181/original/file-20190426-194600-h87jxy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271181/original/file-20190426-194600-h87jxy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271181/original/file-20190426-194600-h87jxy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A dose of empathy can even speed recovery from the common cold.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/confirm/1234611025?src=JA_tBihNi0DXXAlyCxNwGw-1-9&size=medium_jpg">RomarioIen/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Before there was a word for it</h2>
<p>It’s been called <a href="http://pchealthcare.org.uk/">person-centred care</a>, <a href="https://jcompassionatehc.biomedcentral.com/">compassionate care</a>, the <a href="https://balint.co.uk/">Balint</a> method, and <a href="https://www.pointofcarefoundation.org.uk/our-work/schwartz-rounds/">Schwarz rounds</a>, among other things. It’s a <a href="http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199590681.001.0001/acprof-9780199590681-chapter-10">useful philosophical exercise</a> to disambiguate these terms, and I’m among those who are <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0141076818781403">doing just that</a>. Yet beneath all the apparent differences, they all share the goal of putting care back into healthcare. </p>
<p>In the last two decades, empathy has emerged as the <a href="https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2016/10/14/jeffrey-aronson-when-i-use-a-word-a-word-about-empathy/">most popular</a> and arguably the <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0141076818769477">most evidence-based</a> of these “caring” therapies. Research on empathy in healthcare is blossoming, with the number of medical journals using the term in research papers increasing tenfold over the last few decades. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.gmc-uk.org/-/media/documents/06---generic-professional-capabilities---published-version_pdf-64818615.pdf">GMC considers empathy</a> to be an essential component of good communication, and there are now training courses on the subject in the <a href="http://empathetics.com/our-products/">US</a>, <a href="https://www.phc.ox.ac.uk/research/oxford-empathy-programme">UK</a> and <a href="https://www.sacap.edu.za/blog/psychology/what-is-empathy/">South Africa</a>.</p>
<p>Yet the word “empathy” is quite new in the English language, first appearing in <a href="http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/61284?redirectedFrom=empathy#eid">1895</a>. It was originally borrowed from the <a href="https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2016/10/14/jeffrey-aronson-when-i-use-a-word-a-word-about-empathy/">German word “einfülung” and French word “empathie”</a>. It is defined as the ability to understand or appreciate another person’s feelings or experience (“<a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00201741003784663">expressive understanding</a>”). In healthcare, it has come to capture the idea of practitioners taking time to <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0141076818781403">understand the patient’s condition, showing they understand, then caring for them</a>. Understanding, communicating and caring all pre-date the word “empathy”.</p>
<p>Throughout the history of medicine, and across cultures, prominent medical practitioners and other smart people have recognised that treating a patient requires more than just dispensing medicine. King Solomon (990—931 BC) wrote: “Pleasant words are a honeycomb, sweet to the soul, and health to the bones” (Proverbs 16:24). Hippocrates (460-370 BC) famously said that “it is more important to know what sort of person has a disease than to know what sort of disease a person has”. Sun Szu-Miao (died 682, known as China’s King of Medicine) instructed doctors: “Commit oneself with great compassion to save every living creature”. Hospice care in medieval times focused on – literally – hospitality for very sick patients.</p>
<p>Empathy got squeezed out as medicine became more professional and scientific. In the 18th century, paternalism wasn’t just normal, it was valued. Patients were expected to unquestioningly do what doctors like Sir Lancelot Spratt told them. The <a href="https://archive.org/details/b22376446">American Medical Association’s first code of ethics</a> (1847) stated:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The obedience of a patient to the prescriptions of his physician should be prompt and implicit. He should never permit his own crude opinions as to their fitness to influence his attention to them.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The paternalistic model faded throughout the 20th century. Sigmund Freud established the importance of psychology, which requires talking to patients in a non-paternalistic way, and in the 1960s Hungarian psychoanalyst <a href="https://balint.co.uk/balint-quotations/">Michael Bailint</a> claimed that the “doctor is a drug”, and introduced his training for medical students. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, the thalidomide scandal damaged trust in medicine. From out in left field, Ivan Illich even claimed in the 1970s that <a href="https://jech.bmj.com/content/57/12/919">medicine did more harm than good</a>. This put patients on a more equal footing with healthcare practitioners and required more mutual understanding. Today, healthcare practitioners in most developed countries couldn’t get away with ignoring patient views, even if they wanted to.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271184/original/file-20190426-194627-1f382j1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271184/original/file-20190426-194627-1f382j1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271184/original/file-20190426-194627-1f382j1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271184/original/file-20190426-194627-1f382j1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271184/original/file-20190426-194627-1f382j1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271184/original/file-20190426-194627-1f382j1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271184/original/file-20190426-194627-1f382j1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Baby born to a mother who had taken thalidomide while pregnant.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=4247382">Otis Historical Archives National Museum of Health and Medicine/Wikimedia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The move towards empathic communication has been helped by famous medical practitioners, such as <a href="http://atulgawande.com/book/being-mortal/">Atul Gawande</a>, who writes about the importance of good communication in end-of-life care, and <a href="https://www.ranaawdishmd.com/">Rana Awdish</a>, who realised how important empathy was when she became a patient.</p>
<p>As strange as it seems to us, paternalism was not as bad as it appears. At the time when paternalism was the norm, “village doctors” lived in their patients’ communities, and knew their patients well. This helped them understand things about the patients that are now being eroded as <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a867">continuity of care is less common</a>.</p>
<h2>Is empathy innate?</h2>
<p>Some people still believe that empathic communication – or any communication, for that matter – can’t be taught. Either you are born to be a good empathic communicator, or you are not. Some other practitioners I’ve spoken to believe that all or, at any rate, the vast majority of healthcare practitioners already communicate with empathy. Both those statements are only partly true. </p>
<p>We all know people who have different levels of communication skills. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t improve those skills. In fact, a systematic review of 13 trials (1,466 healthcare practitioners) found that <a href="https://jcompassionatehc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40639-016-0024-9">empathic communication can be taught</a>. Practitioners who start off being great communicators probably improved less than those who started off with less “innate” skill. But that doesn’t mean they didn’t improve. Just as Olympic gold medallists still benefit from good coaching, good communicators probably benefit from practice and training.</p>
<p>It’s also only partly true that the great majority of healthcare practitioners already communicate empathy very well. Our latest <a href="https://bmcmededuc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12909-017-0967-3">research</a> found that the extent to which patients feel that their practitioners express empathy varies widely. In our study, we analysed the combined data from 64 published studies on doctor empathy. In the studies, the <a href="http://www.caremeasure.org/">patients were asked</a> ten questions such as: Does your doctor really listen to you? Did they make you feel at ease? And: Did your doctor put together a helpful plan of action for you? The highest empathy rating is 50.</p>
<p>We found substantial variability. Female practitioners were ranked as more empathic than male practitioners (43/50 versus 35/50), allied health professionals, such as physiotherapists, more empathic than doctors (45/50 versus 40/50), and practitioners from Australia and the US (45/50) being ranked as slightly more empathic than their counterparts in the UK (43/50), Germany (41/50) and China (41/50).</p>
<p>Our research also showed a link between spending more time with patients and greater patient-rated empathy. We don’t know whether spending more time caused more empathy, whether greater empathy caused practitioners to spend time, or whether empathy and more time are inseparable.</p>
<p>Among healthcare practitioners who were rated as less empathic (or who spend less time), it could be that they simply aren’t empathic or don’t want to spend more time with their patients. (Time, after all, is money in many healthcare practices.) But this seeming lack of empathy or willingness to spend more time with patients could be a result of outside pressures. </p>
<p>A recent study found that for every hour spent with patients, doctors spent <a href="https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2546704/allocation-physician-time-ambulatory-practice-time-motion-study-4-specialties">two hours doing paperwork</a>. That and other system-level factors are leading to <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j3360">burnout</a> and <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/362/bmj.k3705">worse care</a>. </p>
<p>It stands to reason that healthcare managers, and society at large, have to be empathic towards healthcare practitioners if we would like them to be empathic towards us. When system-level pressures are a <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/357/bmj.j2527">contributing cause of suicide among junior doctors in the UK</a>, society is failing to be empathic towards our healthcare practitioners.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271186/original/file-20190426-194616-15i8wil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271186/original/file-20190426-194616-15i8wil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271186/original/file-20190426-194616-15i8wil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271186/original/file-20190426-194616-15i8wil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271186/original/file-20190426-194616-15i8wil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271186/original/file-20190426-194616-15i8wil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271186/original/file-20190426-194616-15i8wil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Allied health professionals are more empathic than doctors, according to one survey.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/confirm/1212240370?src=aMP07lUnPZPDLmL091HvZA-1-40&size=medium_jpg">goodluz/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Dismissing the sceptics</h2>
<p>Most people believe that empathy in medicine is a good thing, but there are some sceptics. Some worry that too much empathy <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-018-4443-5">leads to burnout</a>. And it’s easy to see how this might happen. </p>
<p>A doctor who is always empathic with their patients might actually experience the emotions of all their patients, and this could be draining. Trying to prevent this “compassion fatigue” is one explanation for why empathy seems to <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22455699">decline throughout medical school</a>. Students may learn to protect themselves against that kind of burnout by becoming less empathic. But this only applies if you need to actually experience the emotions of another (this is called “affective empathy”). </p>
<p>Affective empathy is often impossible. For example, I’ll never know what it actually feels like to give birth to a baby. Luckily, you don’t need to actually experience someone else’s emotions to be empathic. I did my best to be empathic to my wife when she was delivering our baby by trying to imagine how much pain and anxiety she was experiencing and doing my best to support her. </p>
<p>Also, some evidence suggests that empathy actually <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4880744/">reduces fatigue and burnout</a>. Meanwhile, where it might be a risk factor for fatigue or burnout, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25796117">good leadership is needed to prevent it</a>, and there is some evidence that <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23667348">mindfulness</a> may mitigate the extra fatigue caused by empathy. Moreover, empathic care improves patient satisfaction, reduces the risk of being sued for medical malpractice and thus removes a major source of stress.</p>
<p>Some people also claim that we don’t need empathy in really important cases. If you get into a serious car accident, you need a paramedic to do something not stop and ask you how you feel. A patient with advanced stage cancer who wants treatment needs prompt action more than long heart-to-heart chats. </p>
<p>Even with less serious illnesses, some patients don’t really want an empathic doctor – they want paternalism. But since empathy is defined as the ability to understand a patient, I don’t think these cases are against empathy. We can assume that someone who is in a car accident needs a paramedic without talking to them about their feelings. In fact, talking to them in that circumstance would be unempathic. Likewise, for someone who wants to be told what to do, an empathic doctor who understands their patient’s needs will act paternalistically. Forcing empathy on someone is not empathic.</p>
<p>In surgery, and other medical procedures that demand skill, we might only care about the person’s skill. If I need surgery, I want the surgeon with the best track record in that kind of surgery. I don’t care if they are empathic or even if they can talk. </p>
<p>But the decision to have surgery or not often does require an empathic conversation. For example, a conversation I had with my doctor led to <a href="http://www.jeremyhowick.com/ran-first-marathon-saved-nhs-2000/">me avoiding recommended surgery</a>, saving the NHS thousands of pounds. I even recovered well enough to run a marathon.</p>
<p>Healthcare managers worry that empathy takes more time and is therefore unrealistic in a cash-strapped healthcare system. In fact, we found a <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28823250">link between time spent with patients and empathy</a>. What we don’t know is whether the additional time was cost effective. If the longer consultations lead to reduced medication and fewer hospital admissions, then it could be cost effective. A <a href="https://www.southampton.ac.uk/medicine/academic_units/projects/empathica.page">research team in Southampton</a>, Oxford and Keele is doing more research to investigate this. </p>
<p>More importantly, expressing empathy doesn’t necessarily take more time. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4439824/">Empathic body language</a> – looking at the patient instead of a screen, nodding to acknowledge the patient is heard, and smiling – doesn’t take more time. And one study even showed that when doctors sat beside their patients (empathic body language), as opposed to standing up, patients thought they spent <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21719234">more time although it was the same</a>.</p>
<p>From my research in this field, it is clear that most areas of healthcare (bar those emergency situations) could benefit from being more empathic. But it is also clear that systems need to change so that healthcare practitioners can spend more time on empathy than on paperwork. In the words of the physician William Osler: “The good physician treats the disease; the great physician treats the patient who has the disease.”</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/313478/original/file-20200204-41481-1n8vco4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/313478/original/file-20200204-41481-1n8vco4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=112&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/313478/original/file-20200204-41481-1n8vco4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=112&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/313478/original/file-20200204-41481-1n8vco4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=112&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/313478/original/file-20200204-41481-1n8vco4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/313478/original/file-20200204-41481-1n8vco4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/313478/original/file-20200204-41481-1n8vco4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>For you: more from our <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/insights-series-71218?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=InsightsUK">Insights series</a>:</em></p>
<ul>
<li><p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/they-put-a-few-coins-in-your-hands-to-drop-a-baby-in-you-265-stories-of-haitian-children-abandoned-by-un-fathers-114854?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=InsightsUK">‘They put a few coins in your hands to drop a baby in you’ – 265 stories of Haitian children abandoned by UN fathers</a></em></p></li>
<li><p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/the-end-of-the-world-a-history-of-how-a-silent-cosmos-led-humans-to-fear-the-worst-120193?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=InsightsUK">The end of the world: a history of how a silent cosmos led humans to fear the worst</a></em></p></li>
<li><p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/decades-neglecting-an-ancient-disease-has-triggered-a-health-emergency-around-the-world-121282?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=InsightsUK">Decades neglecting an ancient disease has triggered a health emergency around the world</a></em></p></li>
</ul>
<p><em>To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/the-daily-newsletter-2?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=InsightsUK"><strong>Subscribe to our newsletter</strong></a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/113593/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jeremy Howick receives funding from the National Institutes of Health Research.</span></em></p>Evidence for the benefits of empathy in healthcare is mounting.Jeremy Howick, Director of the Oxford Empathy Programme, University of OxfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1111472019-04-16T10:46:25Z2019-04-16T10:46:25ZWhat it means to ‘know your audience’ when communicating about science<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/267853/original/file-20190405-180036-19aamqc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1625%2C745%2C4365%2C3206&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">You have a lot of work to do before you step up to the mic.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/microphone-voice-speaker-seminar-classroom-lecture-534042616">Chinnapong/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Communication experts love to tell people to know their audience, but it is not always clear what they’re meant to know.</p>
<p>Knowing someone’s age, education and gender is nice. So too is knowing context about economic, educational, cultural and ideological background. These are typically what the two of us hear when <a href="http://strategicsciencecommunication.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Landscape-Overview-Website-Discussion-Final.pdf">we’ve asked science communication trainers</a> what they think the expression means. </p>
<p>Knowing such things are helpful, but there’s a lot more a strategic communicator might want to know.</p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=0ssM57wAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Our own</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=WHQF1CUAAAAJ&hl=en">ongoing research</a> on <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728478">strategic science communication objectives</a> suggests some more targeted pieces of information that could help communicators – whether scientists or anyone else – effectively share their message.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266172/original/file-20190327-139356-a7cv19.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266172/original/file-20190327-139356-a7cv19.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266172/original/file-20190327-139356-a7cv19.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266172/original/file-20190327-139356-a7cv19.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266172/original/file-20190327-139356-a7cv19.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266172/original/file-20190327-139356-a7cv19.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=463&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266172/original/file-20190327-139356-a7cv19.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=463&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266172/original/file-20190327-139356-a7cv19.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=463&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Choosing to take part in a particular event suggests certain things about attendees.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/nrcs_south_dakota/8267472111">USDA NRCS South Dakota/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Know your audience by picking your audience</h2>
<p>To start, if you’re being strategic, you should know something about your audience because you should have picked who you’re communicating with based on your goals.</p>
<p>In general, the hope is that experts like the scientists we study would have shifted valuable time or resources from their regular work to communication because there’s some sort of behavior they want to see in some specific group or groups. The behavior could be individual – things such as drinking less, buying greener products, choosing a science career – or civic – behaviors such as supporting, opposing or disregarding an issue.</p>
<p>No communicator – including scientists – should spend limited time, money and opportunity on audiences that aren’t a priority given their goals. It will rarely make sense to spend resources trying to get an arch-liberal to donate to the National Rifle Association or a diehard lover of science to embrace science even more.</p>
<p>Once you know what you want to accomplish and who you want to accomplish it with, you’re a lot closer to figuring out what you need to know about your audience.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/267855/original/file-20190405-180036-1xvklaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/267855/original/file-20190405-180036-1xvklaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/267855/original/file-20190405-180036-1xvklaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/267855/original/file-20190405-180036-1xvklaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/267855/original/file-20190405-180036-1xvklaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/267855/original/file-20190405-180036-1xvklaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/267855/original/file-20190405-180036-1xvklaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/267855/original/file-20190405-180036-1xvklaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Audiences aren’t obligated to hang on your every word.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/microphone-voice-speaker-seminar-classroom-lecture-534042616">Monkey Business Images/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What does your audience think and feel?</h2>
<p>The next step is figuring something out about the target audience’s beliefs, feelings or way of framing a topic. It is these beliefs, feelings and frames that can change and it is these changes that will increase the odds an audience will meaningfully consider your hoped-for behavior.</p>
<p>The most common types of beliefs that the scientists we study like to share are those related to the knowledge they’re creating through their research. This might be something about new evidence connecting how rising greenhouse gases are changing the climate, a lack of connection between vaccines and risk, or any other new finding. This preference seems to stem from scientists’ belief that their audience has a crucial gap in its knowledge or way of thinking.</p>
<p>Increasing basic knowledge sometimes gets dismissed in science communication circles; there’s little evidence that <a href="https://www.nap.edu/read/23595/chapter/1">information-focused initiatives</a> work very well. More and more facts rarely produce substantial behavioral changes. Worse, although researchers haven’t carefully tested it, anyone who’s sat through a boring lecture can probably attest to the fact that sharing too much technical detail can turn an audience off.</p>
<p>On the other hand, most audiences probably expect to hear about experts’ work and so experts likely need to share some information about what they’re finding or they risk failing to meet people’s expectations.</p>
<p>Just as importantly, there are many other facts beyond those associated with technical knowledge that communicators could ethically want people to come to believe.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266175/original/file-20190327-139349-p135i5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266175/original/file-20190327-139349-p135i5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266175/original/file-20190327-139349-p135i5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=687&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266175/original/file-20190327-139349-p135i5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=687&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266175/original/file-20190327-139349-p135i5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=687&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266175/original/file-20190327-139349-p135i5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=863&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266175/original/file-20190327-139349-p135i5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=863&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266175/original/file-20190327-139349-p135i5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=863&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Expressing shared values can help build trust and connection.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/dvids/5447684077">DVIDSHUB/Spc. Tobey White/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For the topics we study, it might be helpful to really know, for example, if an audience believes the research team is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119206422.ch21">competent, honest, caring</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2015.1118149">open</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.216173">similar to them</a> when it comes to values. If this is not how the scientists are perceived, it’s important to know so the communicator can make communication choices that give the audience a chance to learn a bit more about the team – assuming they do embody these characteristics.</p>
<p>This might mean sharing a bit about their credentials and the sophisticated effort that went into the pertinent research, the motives that drive the team or what they do to make sure they’re always listening to others’ views.</p>
<p>These trust-related communication objectives may be particularly important for making it more likely that someone <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1952-5_10">will pay attention and think about what you have to say</a>. For example, audience members may lack the motivation to truly listen to someone that they believe is dishonest or incompetent.</p>
<p>Similarly, if the goal is to promote behaviors, it helps to know what the audience thinks about those behaviors. Do they believe in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.01.003">risks or benefits</a> of what the research suggests? Which do they think about most? And what do they <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.11.012">think their family and friends think and do</a> – what social psychologists call subjective and descriptive norms? Do they think they even have the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515595348">ability to do what’s being suggested</a> or believe that doing so will make a difference?</p>
<p>It may also be important to know <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2005.04.006">how the audience feels</a>, what <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13282">emotions are driving behavior</a> and how they <a href="https://doi.org/10.3200/ENVT.51.2.12-23">mentally frame the issue</a>.</p>
<h2>You can’t know everything about your audience</h2>
<p>Of course it’s impossible to know everything about your audience. You can make educated bets – and you can also ask for help from a communication expert or longtime leader in your organization or a group you belong to. In our area of study, these might be the public information officers at universities or scientific societies. They want to help and the good ones are constantly tracking stakeholder views on various issues you might want to address.</p>
<p>There are also many things you probably can’t change about your audience through communication – like an individual’s core values – although these can affect how what you communicate gets interpreted. And that’s why you have to prioritize by being clear on your goals and starting with an understanding of your audience. Communication theory and formative research are meant to <a href="https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/public-communication-campaigns/book234975">help with such strategizing</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/111147/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John C. Besley receives or has received funding from the National Science Foundation (AISL 1421214-1421723), the United States Department of Agriculture (MICL02468), the Albert and Mary Lasker Foundation, the John Templeton Foundation, the Rita Allen Foundation, the David & Lucile Packard Foundation, and the Kavli Foundation for research related to this article. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of these organizations.
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anthony Dudo receives funding or has received funding from the National Science Foundation (AISL 1421214-1421723), the Albert and Mary Lasker Foundation, the John Templeton Foundation, the Rita Allen Foundation, the David & Lucile Packard Foundation, and the Kavli Foundation for research related to this article. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of these organizations. </span></em></p>Connecting with an audience in a productive way can mean first figuring out what they think, feel and believe before you start sharing your message.John C. Besley, Ellis N. Brandt Professor of Public Relations, Michigan State UniversityAnthony Dudo, Associate Professor of Advertising and Public Relations, The University of Texas at AustinLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/880162017-11-26T22:58:39Z2017-11-26T22:58:39ZIn a time of robots, educators must invest in emotional labour<p>Technology critics and defenders alike argue that <a href="https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2017/sep/19/robots-could-take-4m-private-sector-jobs-within-10-years">human jobs are being eliminated</a> by workplace automation, <a href="https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608580/eliminating-the-human/">minimizing</a> the need for human interaction. </p>
<p>Another way to see it is that emerging tech is increasing our capacity to focus our collective energies — on the social, cultural, <a href="http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/is-it-ok-for-a-city-to-track-whats-in-your-poop/">ethical</a> and emotional demands of our rapidly changing world.</p>
<p>Everything from smart phones to <a href="https://theconversation.com/smart-cities-present-risks-opportunities-80665">smart cities</a> are freeing us up to care more for others and to commit more resources to transforming the parts of our societies and economies where need and inequities persist. </p>
<p>Automation creates new opportunities to privilege, value and grow human interaction, soft skills and our mutual understanding of and appreciation for people.</p>
<h2>Supporting the well-being of Canadians</h2>
<p>Canada is well positioned here. The country began long ago to shift away from manufacturing in favour of a <a href="http://www.canadianbusiness.com/economy/the-bank-of-canada-sees-services-not-manufacturing-as-canadas-future/">service-based economy</a>. </p>
<p>Today, as more and more baby boomers reach retirement age, <a href="http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/canada-to-spend-more-than-6-600-per-person-on-health-care-in-2017-1.3665393">health care is one of the fastest growing industries</a>. Economic powerhouses like education, public administration, retail, finance, real estate and communications continue to grow. <a href="http://www.horizons.gc.ca/en/content/significant-shifts-key-economic-sectors">Service industries represent more than 70 per cent of Canada’s gross domestic product (GDP)</a> and this share will only increase over time.</p>
<p>The implication, then, is that the country’s present and future depend very much on our ability to understand and meet the needs of people. This means investing in the research, education and skills training opportunities that support the well-being of Canadians.</p>
<p>Here again Canada is headed in the right direction. Earlier this year, <a href="http://www.sciencereview.ca/eic/site/059.nsf/eng/home">Canada’s Fundamental Science Review Panel</a> submitted its final report to Minister of Science Kirsty Duncan, on the state of basic and applied research. </p>
<p>The study identified gaps in the country’s research ecosystem and made recommendations to enhance Canada’s investigator-led research capacity. The panel’s remit was broad, examining research inquiry and apparatus in science, technology, engineering and math through to health sciences, social sciences and humanities.</p>
<p>Much of the <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/ottawa-must-improve-research-funding-or-risk-losing-the-innovation-race/article36314667/">debate that followed</a> has focused on where and how to spend federal research dollars to improve the country’s knowledge production, <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-commentary/investing-in-research-is-the-best-way-to-create-an-innovative-economy/article35897100/">innovation capacity</a> and <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/science-review-naylor-1.4064305">path to prosperity</a>. </p>
<p>More of the debate needs to focus on why Canada must invest in research for end-users in the public, private and not-for-profit sectors without shortchanging teaching, learning and skills development.</p>
<h2>The challenge of serving others</h2>
<p>To build research capacity we need to build skills, training and knowledge translation capacity. The three go hand in hand.</p>
<p>The real and potential economic and social value of research carried out in Canada’s post-secondary education institutions is not well understood or communicated to the various stakeholder groups that stand to benefit. </p>
<p>It is not well understood, for example, that research funding distributed through our <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/science/researchfunding.html">federal granting agencies</a> is contributing to the training and skills development of undergraduate and graduate students involved in research.</p>
<p>Or that the toughest tasks these future workers will face won’t be technical, but interpersonal — working with, understanding and serving others. </p>
<p>Canada’s research community must do more to translate and transfer the practical benefits of its work. And, alas, there’s no easy way to automate the process.</p>
<h2>Emotional labour is key to growth</h2>
<p>What this means for now is that we’re undermining our own potential to address complex challenges — social, scientific or otherwise — to innovate and allocate our resources. School boards, universities, polytechnics and colleges all have important roles to play. So do employers.</p>
<p>Studies of employers, human resources staff and job databases have shown steadily growing demand over the past 35 years for soft skills, social skills or what <a href="https://aeon.co/essays/the-key-to-jobs-in-the-future-is-not-college-but-compassion">one writer for Aeon magazine recently called “emotional labour.”</a> </p>
<p>In economic terms, these skills are the key to productivity and growth in the service industries. Which is why the time and money that technology saves us must be reinvested — in cultivating, contextualizing, communicating with and caring for people.</p>
<p>There will soon be an algorithm to diagnose your health problem, a driverless air taxi to take you to the hospital and <a href="https://theconversation.com/3d-printers-a-revolutionary-frontier-for-medicine-83031">a robot to perform surgery on you</a>, while <a href="https://theconversation.com/nurses-of-the-future-must-embrace-high-tech-86042">post-op or palliative care will be handled by a team of sociable machines</a>.</p>
<p>If we under-invest in the research and training that support the development of social, emotional and communication skills in relentless pursuit of research commercialization or bigger and better robots, we’ll miss the crucial opportunity that new technology affords us. </p>
<p>Canada might up end making better things, not making things better.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88016/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew McKean is Associate Director of Education at The Conference Board of Canada, an independent, evidence-based, not-for-profit applied research organization based in Ottawa. The Conference Board is not a government department or agency, although it is often hired to provide services for all levels of government. It is funded exclusively through the fees it charges for services to the public and private sectors. Matthew directs the research agenda, stakeholder relations, and convenes meetings for a multi-year education and skills research centre, which involves consulting with post-secondary education institutions, governments, non-profits, community-based organizations, businesses and industries in Canada. Once upon a time he held a SSHRC doctoral fellowship.</span></em></p>In their relentless pursuit of research commercialization, and bigger robots, universities might miss the real opportunity of technology - to make our world a better place.Matthew McKean, Adjunct Research Professor, Department of History, Carleton UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/867542017-11-13T19:00:22Z2017-11-13T19:00:22ZDemand for people skills is growing faster than demand for STEM skills<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/193885/original/file-20171109-14167-17phj7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">High level interpersonal and problem solving skills are what will make you employable in a digital world.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Advances in digital technology are changing the world of work. It has been <a href="http://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/The_Future_of_Employment.pdf">estimated</a> that more than 40% of human workers will be replaced by robots. This <a href="http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/the-risk-of-automation-for-jobs-in-oecd-countries_5jlz9h56dvq7-en">probably overstates the scale of displacement</a>, but developments in the fields of artificial intelligence and machine learning will affect all sectors of the economy. </p>
<p>However, the impacts of digital disruption will not be evenly distributed. Previous waves of technology had the greatest impacts for workers in routine jobs, but now <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-future-of-the-professions-9780198713395?cc=au&lang=en&">a growing number</a> of roles may be at risk. </p>
<p>Even so, workers whose skills complement <a href="https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/118/4/1279/1925105">but are not substituted for by technology</a> can <a href="https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/622156/mod_resource/content/1/Erik-Brynjolfsson-Andrew-McAfee-Jeff-Cummings-The-Second-Machine-Age.pdf">use the new technology to be more productive</a> and command higher wages. </p>
<p>What types of skills will ensure you are employable in the world of human and robot workers?</p>
<p>Two recent reports, “<a href="http://tafeqld.edu.au/resources/pdf/about-us/research-papers/vet-era.pdf">The VET Era</a>” and “<a href="https://jobsqueensland.qld.gov.au/projects/growing-opportunities-in-the-fraser-coast/">Growing Opportunities in the Fraser Coast</a>” challenge the rhetoric around the importance of STEM skills in the digital economy, by revealing how demand for skills has changed over time. </p>
<h2>1. Increasing demand for highly skilled workers</h2>
<p>These analyses show a major shift in the skills profile of the Australian workforce. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/C4BECE1704987586CA257089001A9181">classifies occupations</a> into skill levels based on the amount of training and experience required to perform the job. </p>
<p>In 1986, the largest group of workers was in occupations classified as skill level 4 (roughly equivalent to a certificate II or III). Since then, demand for highly skilled workers has grown rapidly. Nowadays, the largest group of workers is in the highest (skill level 1) category - occupations requiring a bachelor degree or higher qualification. </p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ODNaG/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="473"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>Essentially, increased reliance on technology in the work environment raises demand for more highly skilled workers, because the more routine work is automated. While it is good that more of us are working in more rewarding jobs, not everyone has benefited from this shift. Nor can the current winners in the digital economy afford to be complacent. As the capability of digital technology increases, a growing range of tasks (such as data analysis and diagnosis) can be automated.</p>
<p>So what types of skills should we be developing when we invest in the higher qualifications that are now required in most jobs? </p>
<p>To answer this question, we linked <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/6103.0%7EJun%202016%7EMain%20Features%7EDetailed%20information%20on%20products%7E9">Australian employment data</a> with <a href="https://www.onetonline.org/">United States data</a> on the skills and abilities associated with different occupations. </p>
<p>By linking these datasets, we could estimate (based on the changing occupational composition of the Australian workforce) which skills and abilities were becoming more or less important. For simplicity, we have grouped these skills and abilities into four categories: traditional Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) skills, communications skills, technical skills and generic STEM skills. </p>
<h2>2. Communication and people skills are increasingly important</h2>
<p>The analyses reveal that, despite all the hype about STEM skills, occupations requiring communication skills are actually growing fastest.</p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/cgkp3/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="170"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>As our work becomes increasingly technologically enabled, human workers differentiate themselves from machine workers through their ability to connect, communicate, understand and build relationships. Most of us now work in the services sector. This is the sector that will continue to grow as the population becomes older and wealthier, as we up-skill and re-skill more often, and as the incidence of mental disorders, chronic diseases and obesity continues to rise. The delivery of these services requires people-focused skills such as active listening, empathy and teamwork.</p>
<h2>3. Programming skills are less important than digital literacy</h2>
<p>Given that coding is now part of the curriculum for Australian primary school children, it may be surprising to learn that growth in demand for communication skills actually outstrips growth in demand for STEM skills. More detailed analyses provides further insight into the way demand for STEM skills has been evolving. </p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/kWxzE/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="430"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>What they reveal is that the STEM skills needed in a wide range of contexts and roles are those that involve working with (rather than programming) technology - skills such as the ability to think critically, analyse systems and interact with computers. </p>
<p>More traditional STEM skills (such as physics, mathematics, and programming) have been experiencing relatively low growth. In fact, recent <a href="https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/132/4/1593/3861633">research</a> from the United States found that there has been a slight decline in the number of traditional STEM jobs since 2000. </p>
<p>Although traditional STEM skills are important, they are only needed by a relatively small number of highly skilled professionals - perhaps because programming work is itself able to be automated and sent offshore.</p>
<p>These STEM professionals also tend to achieve <a href="https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/132/4/1593/3861633">higher incomes</a> if they combine their technical expertise with strong social skills, allowing them to make the connection between technological capability and social needs. While the most skilled coders will continue to have great opportunities, most of us will just need to be able to work with technology. People skills will continue to become more, not less, important. </p>
<p>As the capability of technology continues to develop, human workers need to focus on building skills that complement technology. High-level interpersonal and problem-solving skills are not so easily automated. Given that we will need to find new jobs to replace those lost to the robots, we also will need entrepreneurial skills to create and grow the new economic opportunities enabled by these developments. </p>
<p>As technological advances occur ever more rapidly, we will need to keep discovering new ways of using technology to perform our work. With strong communication, problem-solving and digital literacy skills, we can harness the power of digital technology to solve a customer’s problem, grow productivity and improve our world.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/86754/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Claire Mason's research has been funded by TAFE Queensland, Jobs Queensland, the Commonwealth Government Department of Employment and CSIRO's Data61.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Reeson's research has been funded by TAFE Queensland, Jobs Queensland, The Commonwealth Government Department of Employment and Data61.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Todd Sanderson's research has been funded by TAFE Queensland, Jobs Queensland, The Commonwealth Government Department of Employment and Data61.</span></em></p>Despite the hype about STEM skills, research shows interpersonal, problem-solving and entrepreneurial skills will make you more employable in the 21st century.Claire Mason, Data61 Senior Social Scientist, CSIROAndrew Reeson, Economist, Data61, CSIROTodd Sanderson, Research Scientist in Digital Economics, CSIROLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/826632017-09-20T03:13:50Z2017-09-20T03:13:50ZScience communicators must consider short-term objectives while keeping their eyes on the prize<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186679/original/file-20170919-22701-1ay2gj7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Planning a communication strategy isn't unethical.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/female-manager-putting-his-ideas-writing-466269749">Have a nice day Photo/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Most scientists say they got into science to <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-6-scientists-and-their-careers/">make the world a better place</a> and recognize this means sharing what they learn with a range of other people. But deciding to engage also means deciding what to communicate, and it’s at this stage that things get complicated.</p>
<p>Scientists’ most important communication decision may be figuring out their goals. Do they want to help shape local, state or national policy discussions? Do they want to influence individual behavior, such as diet choices, medical decisions or career paths?</p>
<p>Big-picture goal choice is, however, relatively simple, as it likely originates from scientists’ research, resources and personal preferences. </p>
<p>As public engagement researchers, we suggest the quality of science communication actually hinges on a second set of decisions. Scientists need to figure out what specific, immediate objectives they want to achieve through their communication efforts. </p>
<p>In our view, objectives are a bit tricky because they’re often left unstated and defy easy metaphors. In planning a dinner, they’re not the specific dishes you choose (we’d call those “tactics” or “activities”) and they’re not the goal of a satisfying meal. Instead, you set objectives in the planning phase when decisions are made to start with something savory and light, move on to something satisfying, and finish with something sweet and fun. </p>
<p>The importance of objectives emerges from the fact that communication doesn’t, for example, directly affect whether someone supports genetically modified food. Instead, increased support might be predicted to come from communication that changes individual and collective beliefs and feelings about things such as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.02.006">risks, benefits and decision-makers</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728478">Our new study in the journal Public Understanding of Science</a> sought to understand what might lead a scientist to prioritize different objectives, particularly those associated with policy views.</p>
<h2>Focusing on objectives</h2>
<p>For a science communicator, prioritizing specific objectives means deciding where to put effort. </p>
<p>Objectives often include increasing an audience’s knowledge and excitement about science. It could also mean wanting people to recognize a shared identity, or scientists’ competence or desire to make the world a better place. Reframing how someone thinks about a topic might also be a communication objective. </p>
<p>Effectively achieving these types of objectives appears to influence an audience’s <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.380">support of particular policy measures</a> that are informed by science.</p>
<p>Someone interested in <a href="https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=9BQWCgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA95&ots=edH57kwRb0&sig=S_qgQgtpp6JISAHSLMM5JUgnHW8#v=onepage&q&f=false">changing behavior</a>, on the other hand, might focus on other objectives. A scientist might want to change someone’s beliefs about what others think or do, or a person’s ability to behave a particular way. Maybe the scientist would like to change how an audience thinks about the likelihood some behavior will have an impact, or their perceived risks or benefits around an activity. </p>
<p>In the case of trying to garner support for GMOs, a focus on objectives might mean prioritizing messages or behaviors that communicate that scientists respect and listen to public concerns alongside messages related to risks and benefits.</p>
<p>But when do actual scientists value these various objectives? <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728478">In our survey of scientists</a> from across multiple disciplines, we found the best predictors of how much scientists prioritized an objective are the degree to which they’d previously thought about it and the degree to which they see it as ethical. </p>
<p>The degree to which scientists feel an objective can make a difference also seems to be important, along with beliefs about what colleagues think.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186618/original/file-20170919-22604-dfrj54.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186618/original/file-20170919-22604-dfrj54.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186618/original/file-20170919-22604-dfrj54.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186618/original/file-20170919-22604-dfrj54.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186618/original/file-20170919-22604-dfrj54.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186618/original/file-20170919-22604-dfrj54.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186618/original/file-20170919-22604-dfrj54.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186618/original/file-20170919-22604-dfrj54.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">There’s more to effective communication than just downloading information in one direction.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/nicmcphee/2229714614">Nic McPhee</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why focus on objectives?</h2>
<p>While sharing knowledge will always be a primary role of science communicators, <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23595/science-literacy-concepts-contexts-and-consequences">the social scientific consensus</a> is that increasing scientific knowledge is unlikely to substantially increase support for science-related policies or change individual behavior.</p>
<p>On <a href="http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/pgasite/documents/webpage/pga_176867.pdf">politicized issues such as climate change</a>, those with the most scientific knowledge are sometimes the least likely to support science-based policy.</p>
<p>In a study from a few years ago, however, <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23595/science-literacy-concepts-contexts-and-consequences">we interviewed science communication trainers</a> and found that most training rarely broached the topic of objectives. Instead it focused almost exclusively on helping scientists transmit knowledge clearly and in way that was appealing.</p>
<p>Our current study suggests that training might specifically highlight the range of objectives that communication can achieve and how they might be pursued ethically.</p>
<p>And an interesting thing about prioritizing objectives is that doing so can help guide the third step of science communication: the tactical choice of what to actually say and do while sharing knowledge.</p>
<p>For example, <a href="https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=LG-NAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA68&dq=info:ucqpJHmTEeQJ:scholar.google.com&ots=Nqs973GfRV&sig=xQfW2SLqlQfguaWwpls7rNVPXg8#v=onepage&q&f=false">the social psychology literature on fairness</a> shows that people value having a voice in decision-making, even when they don’t get what they want. Science communicators might therefore prioritize ensuring that people with whom they engage believe they have the potential to be heard. </p>
<p>Our sense is that one of the most important roles of <a href="https://www.nap.edu/read/12434/chapter/1">dialogue-based public engagement</a> – a key element of any <a href="https://www.nap.edu/read/23674/chapter/4?term=%22public+engagement%22#25">contemporary science communication plan</a> – is that they it can facilitate both actual and perceived listening. Much of the improvisation training pioneered by the <a href="http://www.aldakavlilearningcenter.org">Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science</a> emphasizes the importance of listening to one’s audience with empathy. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186669/original/file-20170919-22701-18ci7dc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186669/original/file-20170919-22701-18ci7dc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186669/original/file-20170919-22701-18ci7dc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186669/original/file-20170919-22701-18ci7dc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186669/original/file-20170919-22701-18ci7dc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186669/original/file-20170919-22701-18ci7dc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186669/original/file-20170919-22701-18ci7dc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186669/original/file-20170919-22701-18ci7dc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Actor and author Alan Alda advocates training researchers to engage in mutually respectful conversations as they communicate about their work.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Conor Harrigan, Stony Brook University, Courtesy of the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Similarly, we know from <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/111/Supplement_4/13593.full">research on trust</a> that it’s helpful for those seeking support to have a reputation for caring about the needs of others. So if scientists have pursued a topic out of a desire to improve the world, it may help to prioritize communication that conveys that message.</p>
<p>One of the positive things about an emphasis on storytelling in science communication (as in <a href="http://www.randyolsonproductions.com/writing/writing_index.html">the work of Randy Olson</a>) is likely that including a narrative lets scientists talk about their motivation.</p>
<p>Even little choices such as dress and the effort put into designing an attractive and appropriate talk may help shape beliefs about warmth, competence, identity and other potential objectives.</p>
<p>The difficulty is that prioritizing discussion or personal stories means less time for sharing facts. And well-designed, carefully planned communication takes resources. Not everything can be a priority.</p>
<h2>Being strategic isn’t unethical</h2>
<p>In the past, when we’ve written about <a href="https://theconversation.com/science-communication-training-should-be-about-more-than-just-how-to-transmit-knowledge-59643">strategy in science communication</a>, some people have argued that what we suggest amounts to <a href="https://theconversation.com/science-communication-training-should-be-about-more-than-just-how-to-transmit-knowledge-59643#comment_992037">unethical advertising or public relations</a>. Indeed, we teach in those areas so some readers may use this as prima facie evidence of nefarious intent. </p>
<p>But the fact that strategic communication professionals pay attention to the potential effects of their communication choices doesn’t mean the science community should ignore such effects. </p>
<p>It seems obvious that no one should talk about motivations he doesn’t really have, say she is listening when she is not or frame issues in ways that defy logic.</p>
<p>The point is simply that better-quality communication seems likely to occur when communicators make careful choices about objectives that are honest and for which there is <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/110/Supplement_3">social science evidence</a> <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/111/Supplement_4">of effectiveness</a>.</p>
<p>Put differently, our expectation is that scientists are more likely to achieve their goals if they think more deeply about the choices they make along the way and avoid ad hoc communication that isn’t grounded in a careful consideration of the short- and long-term impact of their words and activities.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/82663/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF, Grant AISL 1421214-1421723. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF, Grant AISL 1421214-1421723. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.</span></em></p>Scientists who engage with the public may have goals about influencing policy or behavior. But they also need to think about the short-term objectives that will help get them there.John C. Besley, Associate Professor of Advertising and Public Relations/Ellis N. Brandt Endowed Chair, Michigan State UniversityAnthony Dudo, Assistant Professor of Advertising and Public Relations, The University of Texas at AustinShupei Yuan, Assistant Professor of Public Relations, Northern Illinois UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/682102017-04-21T00:24:52Z2017-04-21T00:24:52ZDefending science: How the art of rhetoric can help<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166154/original/file-20170420-21495-11l33w0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=417%2C0%2C2944%2C2335&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Rhetoric can teach scientists how to effectively communicate what's going on in the lab to the rest of us.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/wackybadger/4355775792">Joshua Mayer</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Science seems to be under attack in America, so much so that scientists and their supporters are <a href="https://www.marchforscience.com/">marching in the streets</a>. </p>
<p>President Donald Trump has publicly called climate change a <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/timeline-every-ridiculous-thing-trump-has-said-about-climate-change-576238">Chinese hoax</a> abetted by greedy scientists. He has linked <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/449525268529815552">vaccines to autism</a> despite overwhelming scientific consensus against these claims. Vice President Mike Pence has <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/shaenamontanari/2016/11/10/vp-elect-mike-pence-does-not-accept-evolution-heres-why-that-matters/#24cc746915a7">denied evolutionary science</a>, the very foundation of modern biology. Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s pick for director of the Office of Management and Budget, has questioned the fully established link between Zika virus and microcephaly and wondered whether “<a href="http://www.snopes.com/trumps-budget-director-pick-asked-really-need-government-funded-research/">we really need government-funded research at all</a>.”</p>
<p>In response, scientists are taking a stand. They are defending their work against what appears to be a new, more aggressive assault in the so-called “<a href="http://www.parlorpress.com/pdf/lookingforafight.pdf">Republican war on science</a>,” as the president threatens <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/trumps-first-budget-analysis-and-reaction">deep cuts</a> to federal funding of scientific research. </p>
<p>When they march for science, they will do well to consider insights from the field of study known as the “rhetoric of science.”</p>
<h2>Studying scientists’ communication</h2>
<p>Before dismissing this recommendation as a perverse appeal to slink into the mud or take up the corrupted weapons of the enemy, keep in mind that in academia, “rhetoric” does not mean rank falsehoods, or mere words over substance. </p>
<p>Rhetoric is one of the original seven liberal arts. Aristotle defined it as “<a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=LNr9CwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&dq=aristotle%20the%20rhetoric&pg=PT18#v=onepage&q&f=false">the faculty of observing, in any given case, the available means of persuasion</a>.” Scholars like me who study the rhetoric of science analyze and evaluate the persuasive communication of scientists.</p>
<p>Although it draws from an ancient tradition, rhetoric of science is a relatively young field of study. It was born in the late 20th century, after historian of science Thomas Kuhn introduced the idea that science develops not through the steady accumulation of facts, but in revolutionary moments. With a paradigm change, the heliocentric model of Copernicus replaces the geocentric model of Ptolemy, Darwin’s natural selection overturns natural theology, plate tectonics wins over the theory of a stable Earth.</p>
<p>Kuhn’s call for a study of “<a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=3eP5Y_OOuzwC&lpg=PP1&dq=kuhn%20structure%20of%20scientific%20revolutions&pg=PA94#v=onepage&q&f=false">the techniques of persuasive argumentation</a>” within scientific communities that settle conflicts between paradigms introduced the “<a href="http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100418551">rhetorical turn</a>” in science studies. Rhetoricians enthusiastically took up the call to look at the way that language and culture help to shape knowledge.</p>
<p>At first, this kind of scholarship seemed hostile to scientists. </p>
<p>In the age of “<a href="https://theconversation.com/seeking-truth-among-alternative-facts-72733">alternative facts</a>,” it is worth remembering that for most of the 20th century, the <a href="http://msupress.org/books/book/?id=50-1D0-3EFD#.WPPjnVKZPdc">image of the scientist as American cultural hero</a> was ascendant.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166162/original/file-20170420-20057-hhkh3b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166162/original/file-20170420-20057-hhkh3b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166162/original/file-20170420-20057-hhkh3b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166162/original/file-20170420-20057-hhkh3b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166162/original/file-20170420-20057-hhkh3b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166162/original/file-20170420-20057-hhkh3b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166162/original/file-20170420-20057-hhkh3b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166162/original/file-20170420-20057-hhkh3b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Lone hero male scientists were long the stereotype.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/tobanblack/3237634613">Toban B.</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Scientists have long presented themselves in public as the inheritors of an American pioneering ethos, the very embodiment of the American spirit of exploration, innovation, hard work and success. You see it in influential engineer Vannevar Bush’s <a href="https://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/nsf50/vbush1945.htm">“Science: The Endless Frontier</a>,” the report that spurred the formation of the National Science Foundation. <a href="http://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/exploring-the-frontiers-of-life/">Geneticist Francis Collins frequently drew an analogy</a> between the Human Genome Project and Lewis and Clark’s Corps of Discovery. This characterization was so powerful that even George W. Bush, a Republican president widely critiqued for his administration’s <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/rsi_final_fullreport_1.pdf">misuse of science</a>, found it necessary to praise scientists as modern-day American “<a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=73682">pioneers</a>.”</p>
<p>In the latter part of the 20th century, when scholars began pointing out that the most effective scientists were those who were also the most effective rhetors, the validity of scientific theories and the institution of science itself seemed to be under attack. Rhetoricians got caught up in the “<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1999/11/phony-science-wars/377882/">science wars</a>” between postmodern deconstructionists and natural scientists. They were viewed with distrust by defenders of science. </p>
<h2>Next phase for rhetoric of science</h2>
<p>But times changed. In the early years of the 21st century, the two cultures of the humanities and the sciences found themselves united against forces that would <a href="https://theconversation.com/public-universities-are-under-threat-not-just-by-outside-reformers-65705">starve higher education of funding</a>. Many rhetoricians began to see their mission not as taking scientists down a peg or two, but as helping scientists improve their public communication.</p>
<p>For example, <a href="http://comm.uga.edu/people/individuals/140">Celeste Condit</a> draws from the rhetorical tradition to help medical geneticists appreciate the importance of understanding their audience. Scientists should be careful not to underestimate the public, which “<a href="http://www.hhmi.org/sites/default/files/Bulletin/2003/September/sept2003_fulltext_0.pdf">knows a fair amount about the basics of heredity</a>.” But neither should they neglect how certain terms affect the public mind. When telling individuals they have a genetic predisposition to cancer, for example, “version of a gene” is a less scary use of words than “mutation,” which evokes horror movie monsters.</p>
<p>Condit’s students, <a href="https://www.eiu.edu/commstudies/faculty.php?id=mgronnvoll">Marita Gronnvoll</a> and <a href="http://www.keene.edu/academics/programs/comm/faculty/290/">Jamie Landau</a>, explore the problems and potentials of the most frequent <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2897184/">metaphors used by the public to discuss genes</a>, such as ticking time bombs and Russian roulette. They recommend that scientists introduce new, more accurate and less alarming metaphors that call to mind the choreography or orchestration of a gene/environment interaction.</p>
<p>Rhetoricians have advice for climate scientists too. <a href="http://college.wfu.edu/communication/faculty-and-staff/ronald-von-burg">Ron Von Burg</a> introduces the rhetorical concept of <a href="http://rhetoric.byu.edu/Figures/L/litotes.htm">litotes</a> as a way for scientists to respond to inaccurate but emotive imagery. Litotes is a figure of speech that works as an understatement by stating the negation of its opposite; imagine a friend hinting that an invitation to visit would “not be unwelcome.”</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166165/original/file-20170420-20050-p3dbel.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166165/original/file-20170420-20050-p3dbel.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166165/original/file-20170420-20050-p3dbel.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=824&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166165/original/file-20170420-20050-p3dbel.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=824&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166165/original/file-20170420-20050-p3dbel.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=824&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166165/original/file-20170420-20050-p3dbel.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1036&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166165/original/file-20170420-20050-p3dbel.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1036&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166165/original/file-20170420-20050-p3dbel.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1036&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">While the scenarios in the movie won’t happen the day after tomorrow, scientists signaled that the message ‘wasn’t untrue.’</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51Xw9QwBPTL._SX940_.jpg">Twentieth Century Fox</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Von Burg <a href="https://www.natcom.org/communication-currents/decades-away-or-day-after-tomorrow">points to scientists</a> who used this strategy effectively when responding to critiques of climate disaster movie <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0319262/">“The Day After Tomorrow</a>.” Climate skeptics denounced the blockbuster as hyperbolic. Climate scientists agreed that its story line about instant climatic shift was absurd. But they also argued that the overall message that climate change requires our attention was “not untrue.” “The film is not scientifically invalid” insofar as the events it depicts – melting ice sheets, powerful hurricanes – are likely to occur, but just over a longer time frame. </p>
<p><a href="http://rhetoric.byu.edu/Persuasive%20Appeals/Ethos.htm">Ethos</a>, or the speaker’s development of a trustworthy character, is another important concept that rhetoricians share with scientists engaged in public debates. <a href="https://communication.chass.ncsu.edu/faculty_staff/jegoodwi">Jean Goodwin</a> has studied how scientists can reach out to skeptical listeners with appeals that signal their vulnerability rather than their superiority. Observing climate scientists speaking to skeptical audiences, she has found that one must <a href="https://jeangoodwin.net/2013/12/03/earning-trust-in-climate-change-debates/">give trust</a> in order to receive it in return. </p>
<p>Some of my own research focuses on how to counter a <a href="https://scienceprogress.org/2008/04/manufactroversy/">manufactroversy</a>: when the public has been told there’s a dispute within the scientific community when there is actually a wide consensus. In these cases, those who would manipulate the public set argumentative traps. One way for scientists to avoid these traps is to point to the history of scientific debate that resulted in the consensus of experts. Sharing such rhetorical strategies is my way of helping climate scientists, as well as experts responding to those who deny the safety of vaccines, or the link between a virus and a disease. </p>
<p>When scientists gather to march for science, I want them to know about this body of research. In addition to carrying signs, they can take up the toolbox of effective communication known as the rhetorical tradition. Rhetoricians will be marching by their side, allies in the battle to protect science from politically motivated attacks on one of the greatest treasures of the nation.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68210/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Leah Ceccarelli does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If you’ve only ever paired the idea of ‘rhetoric’ with ‘empty,’ think again. Rhetoricians of science have concrete techniques to share with researchers to help them communicate their scientific work.Leah Ceccarelli, Professor of Communication, University of WashingtonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/762052017-04-19T14:17:17Z2017-04-19T14:17:17ZCan March for Science participants advocate without losing the public’s trust?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165718/original/image-20170418-32720-1nzqpxc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=655%2C483%2C3997%2C3161&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">What happens to their credibility when scientists take to the streets? February 2017 Stand Up for Science rally in Boston.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/askani97/32208983914">Adam Salsman</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As <a href="https://www.marchforscience.com/">the March for Science</a> nears, questions about whether scientists can and should advocate for public policy become more important. On one hand, scientists have <a href="http://evidencesquared.com/ep7/">relevant expertise to contribute</a> to conversations about public policy. And in the abstract, the American public <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/public-praises-science-scientists-fault-public-media/">supports the idea that scientists should be involved in political debate</a>. On the other hand, scientists who advocate <a href="http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/es0726411">may risk losing the trust of the public</a>. Maintaining that trust is imperative for scientists, both to be able to communicate public risks appropriately and to preserve <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/29/public-and-scientists-views-on-science-and-society/">public funding for research</a>.</p>
<p>Little existing research had tested how audiences react when confronted with concrete examples of scientific advocacy. Led by my colleague John Kotcher, my colleagues and I at the <a href="http://www.climatechangecommunication.org/">George Mason Center for Climate Change Communication</a> devised an <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2016.1275736">experiment to test these questions</a> in the summer of 2014. Our results suggest there is at least some tolerance for advocacy by scientists among the American public. </p>
<h2>Testing a scientist’s perceived credibility</h2>
<p>We asked over 1,200 American adults to read the biography and a single Facebook post of a (fictional) climate scientist named Dr. Dave Wilson. In this post, Dr. Wilson promotes his recent interview regarding his work on climate change. We varied the message of this statement to include a range of advocacy messages – from no advocacy (discussing recent evidence about climate change) to clear advocacy for specific policies to address climate change. </p>
<p><iframe id="8c24n" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/8c24n/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2016.1275736">We found that perceptions of Dr. Wilson’s credibility</a> – and of the scientific community more broadly – did not noticeably decline when he engaged in most types of advocacy. </p>
<p>When Dr. Wilson championed taking action on climate change, without specifying what action, he was considered equally credible as when he described new evidence on climate change or discussed the risks and benefits of a range of policies. In fact, perceptions of Dr. Wilson’s credibility were maintained even when he argued in favor of reducing carbon emissions at coal-fired power plants. </p>
<p>Only when Dr. Wilson advocated for building more nuclear power plants did his credibility suffer.</p>
<h2>Advocacy received differently than partisanship</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165720/original/image-20170418-32720-1b5707m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165720/original/image-20170418-32720-1b5707m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165720/original/image-20170418-32720-1b5707m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165720/original/image-20170418-32720-1b5707m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165720/original/image-20170418-32720-1b5707m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165720/original/image-20170418-32720-1b5707m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1055&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165720/original/image-20170418-32720-1b5707m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1055&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165720/original/image-20170418-32720-1b5707m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1055&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A nonpartisan message may be well-received.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/anubisabyss/32859743202">AnubisAbyss</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Our study suggests that the American public may not see scientists who advocate for general action on scientific issues as lacking in credibility, nor will they punish the scientific community for one scientist’s advocacy. Yet this study represented only one case of scientific advocacy; other forms of advocacy may not be as accepted by the public. For example, more caution is required when scientists promote specific (unpopular) policies.</p>
<p>Most notably, our study did not test overtly partisan statements from Dr. Wilson. Our research participants saw it that way too; they rated all of Dr. Wilson’s statements as more scientific than political.</p>
<p>The March for Science, however, does risk being seen as motivated by partisan beliefs. In that case, scientists may not escape being criticized for their actions. This is especially true if the march is seen as a protest against President Trump or Republicans in general. In our study, conservatives saw Dr. Wilson as less credible whether he engaged in advocacy or not. If conservatives see the march as a protest against their values, <a href="https://theconversation.com/getting-a-scientific-message-across-means-taking-human-nature-into-account-70634">they may dismiss the message</a> of the march – and the messengers – without considering its merits. </p>
<p>This risk is exacerbated when media coverage of the March for Science is considered. In our study, people saw Dr. Wilson promoting his interview in his Facebook post, but were not exposed to the actual interview in which Dr. Wilson made his case for a given policy. Nor were his actions disruptive; a single post on social media is <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19312458.2016.1150443">relatively easy to skip or ignore</a>, and Dr. Wilson could frame his interview in the way he liked.</p>
<p>The March for Science will be the opposite. If successful, the march will garner attention from news outlets, who may reframe the purpose of the march. </p>
<h2>Balancing the advocacy message</h2>
<p>So what can be done to limit accusations of partisan bias surrounding the march?</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165719/original/image-20170418-32716-1p2jg38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165719/original/image-20170418-32716-1p2jg38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165719/original/image-20170418-32716-1p2jg38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165719/original/image-20170418-32716-1p2jg38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165719/original/image-20170418-32716-1p2jg38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165719/original/image-20170418-32716-1p2jg38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165719/original/image-20170418-32716-1p2jg38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165719/original/image-20170418-32716-1p2jg38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Researchers can aim for an inclusive message, avoiding the appearance of being just another interest group.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/askani97/32238804743">Adam Salsman</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One way marchers can minimize this possibility is by crafting an inclusive message that resonates with many people, stressing the ways <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/29/public-and-scientists-views-on-science-and-society/">science improves our society</a> and <a href="http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/faith-morality-environment/">protects future generations</a>. However, the march’s similarity to other explicitly anti-Trump marches may make it hard to avoid a partisan connotation. </p>
<p>Moreover, in our research Dr. Wilson was portrayed as an older white male, <a href="https://doi.org//10.3102/00028312033002261">matching cultural stereotypes about scientists</a>; he may have had more freedom to engage in advocacy than would female or nonwhite scientists. An inclusive and diverse March for Science may challenge these traditional portrayals of scientists. While many (the authors included) would see that as a desirable objective in itself, it may complicate successful advocacy.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.marchforscience.com/mission/">A goal of the March for Science</a> is to demonstrate that science is a nonpartisan issue. It represents a unique opportunity for scientists to highlight the ways in which science improves our society. Scientists participating in the march should emphasize shared values with those who might otherwise disagree – such as the desire to create a better world for our children and grandchildren. </p>
<p>If the event remains a March for Science, rather than a march against a party or group, the chances increase that it will effectively focus attention on the importance of scientific research.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/76205/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The original research reported in this post was supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Energy Foundation, and the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment, none of which bear any responsibility for the findings and interpretations reported here.</span></em></p>The research community tends to assume advocacy doesn’t mix with objectivity. One study suggests there’s room for scientists to make real-world recommendations without compromising their trusted status.Emily Vraga, Assistant Professor in Political Communication, George Mason UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/734372017-03-02T00:39:01Z2017-03-02T00:39:01ZCatchphrase to cliché: how corporate-speak became common in our everyday lives<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/158827/original/image-20170228-29917-tcz4ny.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">‘Going forward’ is a boardroom and husting escapee that has now made it big time in the workplace, and even outside.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Should you ever wish to be reminded of those irritating workplace catchphrases, the internet abounds in news features and helpful sites – <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com.au/business-clichs-to-cut-from-your-vocabulary-2014-12">“26 Annoying Business Clichés You Should Stop Using Immediately”</a>; <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/groupthink/2012/01/26/the-most-annoying-pretentious-and-useless-business-jargon/#24d9b6a52eea">“The Most Annoying, Pretentious And Useless Business Jargon”</a>, to name just two. </p>
<p>There is even <a href="http://clichesite.com/alpha_list.asp?which=lett+1">ClichéSite.com</a>, which claims to be the largest collection of such linguistic pinpricks.</p>
<p>When they start life, clichés are fetching and memorable phrases – good ideas clothed in a well-turned out expression. They might be witty and, if not brilliant, at least interesting in sound and metaphor. </p>
<p>Sports and pastimes lie at the heart of many corporate catchphrases: get/keep the ball rolling; ballpark figure; touch base; moving the goalposts; close of play; par for the course; game-changer; ducks in a row – these are just some of them. </p>
<p>Once these were vibrant and apt, but overuse has sucked them of vitality. Now they walk among the living dead. “Lexical zombies” was British linguist <a href="http://www.cambridge.org/au/academic/subjects/languages-linguistics/english-language-and-linguistics-general-interest/cambridge-encyclopedia-english-language-2nd-edition?format=PB&isbn=9780521530330">David Crystal’s description</a> of clichéd expressions:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Fragments of language apparently dying, but unable to die.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>‘Going forward’</h2>
<p>One expression that is refusing to end its earthly career is “going forward”. </p>
<p>Together with its close relative “moving forward”, it’s a boardroom and husting escapee that has made it big time in the workplace, and even outside. It is loathed by all except those who are too busy moving goalposts and hitting the ground running to notice that this expression does something to the neck hairs of most other speakers.</p>
<p>To go forward – “advance” – has been widely attested in the English language (both in the literal and figurative sense) since the early 1400s. In its early appearances, it signalled some sense of progressing or looking ahead. One quotation in the Oxford English Dictionary from the early 1900s reads: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Humanity everywhere is thinking and talking about going forward.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>With purpose, action and direction at its heart, it’s hardly surprising that the morale booster became the buzzword of business and management. And now, like some sort of linguistic prickly pear, this unstoppable slogan has spread unchecked, even into the nooks and crannies of our conversational lives. </p>
<p>It took the cactoblastis moth to control the infestation of prickly pear. What will it take to eradicate this weedy cliché? Well, there’s the rub (to use another well-worn expression) – cliché is in the eye of the beholder. Put simply it’s an expression you hate. My cherished phrase can be your loathed cliché.</p>
<h2>Why it’s so hated</h2>
<p>In the case of “going forward”, there are probably quite a few reasons why it appears at the top of so many hate lists. </p>
<p>For one, it’s part of managerial jargon – so a social password that identifies that gang. And if you’re not singing from that particular hymn sheet, if it’s not your lingo and you don’t talk the talk, there’s a good chance it will raise gooseflesh. </p>
<p>There are times when going forward is clearly redundant too – “Going forward, it will be increasingly important”; “that’s our strategy going forward” – and this sort of linguistic overkill is an irritation to many. </p>
<p>But it’s at its most irksome when it tries to sweeten up some sort of inconvenient or unpleasant reality. Usually it’s tacked onto the end of the sentence, a bit like the teaspoon of sugar following the tablespoon of cod liver oil.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This ongoing restructuring of the business is a necessary step in creating a leaner organisation going forward. – <strong>Ferrier Hodgson partner James Stewart <a href="http://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/62671-dick-smith-collapse-22-head-office-jobs-go-including-chief-financial-officer-employees-potentially-underpaid-annual-leave/">on Dick Smith’s collapse</a></strong>.</p>
<p>But what we want to see is the opportunity for more teachers in the organisation going forward – <strong>New South Wales Skills Minister John Barilaro <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-13/unclear-how-many-jobs-will-be-lost-in-major-tafe-nsw-overhaul/7623768">on a TAFE overhaul</a></strong>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Here “going forward” is doing its best to put a positive spin on job losses and restructure — not that anyone is fooled. Most of us grow impatient with language that tries to lead us by the nose and weary of the pretence that somehow sweeter words will produce a sweeter world. </p>
<p>“Trumpery” comes to mind – an old but useful expression that describes empty insincere talk, weeds and rubbish of any kind. This is a word that really has come back from the dead – and is going forward in giant strides. <a href="http://www.e-rara.ch/zut/content/titleinfo/9353748">Exhorted John Mortimer</a> in 1721:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Finish your last Weeding, and cleanse your Garden of Trumpery.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, guard against trumpery and humbuggery. But it’s not possible, or even desirable, to eliminate clichés. As academic Walter Redfern once <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Clich%C3%A9s_and_Coinages.html?id=e6xxQgAACAAJ&redir_esc=y">put it</a>, they are “bad, indispensable, sometimes good”.</p>
<p>Even the common prickly pear, before it was a rampaging menace, was a highly valued drought-resistant fodder.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/73437/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Burridge does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When they start life, clichés are fetching and memorable phrases. But overuse has sucked them of vitality – and now they walk among the living dead.Kate Burridge, Professor of Linguistics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/706342017-01-11T02:08:11Z2017-01-11T02:08:11ZGetting a scientific message across means taking human nature into account<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152315/original/image-20170110-29024-qr971p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Yeah, I'm not hearing that.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=452192425">Woman picture via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>We humans have collectively accumulated a lot of science knowledge. We’ve developed vaccines that can eradicate some of the most devastating diseases. We’ve engineered bridges and cities and the internet. We’ve created massive metal vehicles that rise tens of thousands of feet and then safely set down on the other side of the globe. And this is just the tip of the iceberg (which, by the way, we’ve discovered is melting). While this shared knowledge is impressive, it’s not distributed evenly. Not even close. There are too many important issues <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/29/public-and-scientists-views-on-science-and-society/">that science has reached a consensus on that the public has not</a>. </p>
<p>Scientists and the media need to communicate more science and communicate it better. Good communication ensures that scientific <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-academics-are-losing-relevance-in-society-and-how-to-stop-it-64579">progress benefits society</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/science-communication-is-on-the-rise-and-thats-good-for-democracy-62842">bolsters democracy</a>, weakens the potency of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-challenge-facing-libraries-in-an-era-of-fake-news-70828">fake news</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-social-media-can-distort-and-misinform-when-communicating-science-59044">misinformation</a> and fulfills researchers’ <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/why-researchers-should-resolve-to-engage-in-2017-1.21236?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews">responsibility to engage</a> with the public. Such beliefs have motivated <a href="http://www.centerforcommunicatingscience.org/">training programs</a>, <a href="https://www.aaas.org/pes/communicating-science-workshops">workshops</a> and a <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23674/communicating-science-effectively-a-research-agenda">research agenda</a> from the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine on learning more about science communication. A resounding question remains for science communicators: <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-does-research-say-about-how-to-effectively-communicate-about-science-70244">What can we do better?</a></p>
<p>A common intuition is that the main goal of science communication is to present facts; once people encounter those facts, they will think and behave accordingly. The <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23674/communicating-science-effectively-a-research-agenda">National Academies’ recent report</a> refers to this as the “deficit model.”</p>
<p>But in reality, just knowing facts doesn’t necessarily guarantee that one’s opinions and behaviors will be consistent with them. For example, many people “know” that recycling is beneficial but still throw plastic bottles in the trash. Or they read an online article by a scientist about the necessity of vaccines, but leave comments expressing outrage that doctors are trying to further a pro-vaccine agenda. Convincing people that scientific evidence has merit and should guide behavior may be the greatest science communication challenge, particularly in <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-a-post-truth-election-clicks-trump-facts-67274">our “post-truth” era</a>.</p>
<p>Luckily, we know a lot about human psychology – how people perceive, reason and learn about the world – and many lessons from psychology can be applied to science communication endeavors.</p>
<h2>Consider human nature</h2>
<p>Regardless of your religious affiliation, imagine that you’ve always learned that God created human beings just as we are today. Your parents, teachers and books all told you so. You’ve also noticed throughout your life that science is pretty useful – you especially love heating up a frozen dinner in the microwave while browsing Snapchat on your iPhone.</p>
<p>One day you read that scientists have evidence for human evolution. You feel uncomfortable: Were your parents, teachers and books wrong about where people originally came from? Are these scientists wrong? You experience <a href="http://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html">cognitive dissonance</a> – the uneasiness that results from entertaining two conflicting ideas.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152316/original/image-20170110-29019-1s8m21j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152316/original/image-20170110-29019-1s8m21j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152316/original/image-20170110-29019-1s8m21j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/152316/original/image-20170110-29019-1s8m21j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/152316/original/image-20170110-29019-1s8m21j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/152316/original/image-20170110-29019-1s8m21j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/152316/original/image-20170110-29019-1s8m21j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/152316/original/image-20170110-29019-1s8m21j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It’s uncomfortable to hold two conflicting ideas at the same time.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=463867253">Man image via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Psychologist Leon Festinger <a href="http://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=3850">first articulated the theory of cognitive dissonance</a> in 1957, noting that it’s human nature to be uncomfortable with maintaining two conflicting beliefs at the same time. That discomfort leads us to try to reconcile the competing ideas we come across. <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-do-science-issues-seem-to-divide-us-along-party-lines-66626">Regardless of political leaning</a>, we’re hesitant to accept new information that contradicts our existing worldviews.</p>
<p>One way we subconsciously avoid cognitive dissonance is through <a href="https://theconversation.com/confirmation-bias-a-psychological-phenomenon-that-helps-explain-why-pundits-got-it-wrong-68781">confirmation bias</a> – a tendency to seek information that confirms what we already believe and discard information that doesn’t. </p>
<p>This human tendency was first exposed by <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14640746808400161">psychologist Peter Wason</a> in the 1960s in a simple logic experiment. He found that people tend to seek confirmatory information and avoid information that would potentially disprove their beliefs.</p>
<p>The concept of confirmation bias scales up to larger issues, too. For example, psychologists John Cook and Stephen Lewandowsky asked people about their beliefs concerning global warming and then <a href="http://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12186">gave them information stating that 97 percent of scientists agree</a> that human activity causes climate change. The researchers measured whether the information about the scientific consensus influenced people’s beliefs about global warming. </p>
<p>Those who initially opposed the idea of human-caused global warming became even less accepting after reading about the scientific consensus on the issue. People who had already believed that human actions cause global warming supported their position even more strongly after learning about the scientific consensus. Presenting these participants with factual information ended up further polarizing their views, <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-science-for-climate-change-only-feeds-the-denial-how-do-you-beat-that-52813">strengthening everyone’s resolve in their initial positions</a>. It was a case of confirmation bias at work: New information consistent with prior beliefs strengthened those beliefs; new information conflicting with existing beliefs led people to discredit the message as a way to hold on to their original position.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152318/original/image-20170110-29036-1lcs417.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152318/original/image-20170110-29036-1lcs417.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152318/original/image-20170110-29036-1lcs417.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=360&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/152318/original/image-20170110-29036-1lcs417.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=360&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/152318/original/image-20170110-29036-1lcs417.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=360&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/152318/original/image-20170110-29036-1lcs417.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/152318/original/image-20170110-29036-1lcs417.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/152318/original/image-20170110-29036-1lcs417.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Just shouting louder isn’t going to help.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=518718154">Megaphone image via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Overcoming cognitive biases</h2>
<p>How can science communicators share their messages in a way that leads people to change their beliefs and actions about important science issues, given our natural cognitive biases?</p>
<p>The first step is to acknowledge that every audience has preexisting beliefs about the world. Expect those beliefs to color the way they receive your message. Anticipate that people will accept information that is consistent with their prior beliefs and discredit information that is not.</p>
<p>Then, focus on <a href="http://collabra.org/articles/10.1525/collabra.68/">framing</a>. No message can contain all the information available on a topic, so any communication will emphasize some aspects while downplaying others. While it’s unhelpful to cherry-pick and present only evidence in your favor – which can backfire anyway – it is helpful to focus on what an audience cares about.</p>
<p>For example, <a href="http://collabra.org/articles/10.1525/collabra.68/">these University of California researchers point out</a> that the idea of climate change causing rising sea levels may not alarm an inland farmer dealing with drought as much as it does someone living on the coast. Referring to the impact our actions today may have for our grandchildren might be more compelling to those who actually have grandchildren than to those who don’t. By anticipating what an audience believes and what’s important to them, communicators can choose more effective frames for their messages – focusing on the most compelling aspects of the issue for their audience and presenting it in a way the audience can identify with.</p>
<p>In addition to the ideas expressed in a frame, the specific words used matter. Psychologists <a href="http://doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683">Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman first showed</a> when numerical information is presented in different ways, people think about it differently. Here’s an example from their 1981 study:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Imagine that the U.S. is preparing for the outbreak of an unusual Asian disease, which is expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed. Assume that the exact scientific estimate of the consequences of the programs are as follows:
If Program A is adopted, 200 people will be saved.
If Program B is adopted, there is ⅓ probability that 600 people will be saved, and ⅔ probability that no people will be saved.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Both programs have an expected value of 200 lives saved. But 72 percent of participants chose Program A. We reason about mathematically equivalent options differently when they’re framed differently: <a href="http://www.apa.org/monitor/mar05/misfires.aspx">Our intuitions</a> are often not consistent with probabilities and other math concepts.</p>
<p>Metaphors can also act as linguistic frames. Psychologists Paul Thibodeau and Lera Boroditsky found that people who read that crime is a beast proposed different solutions than those who read that crime is a virus – even if they had no memory of reading the metaphor. The <a href="http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782">metaphors guided people’s reasoning</a>, encouraging them to transfer solutions they’d propose for real beasts (cage them) or viruses (find the source) to dealing with crime (harsher law enforcement or more social programs).</p>
<p>The words we use to package our ideas can drastically influence how people think about those ideas.</p>
<h2>What’s next?</h2>
<p>We have a lot to learn. Quantitative research on the efficacy of science communication strategies is in its infancy but <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23674/communicating-science-effectively-a-research-agenda">becoming an increasing priority</a>. As we continue to untangle more about what works and why, it’s important for science communicators to be conscious of the biases they and their audiences bring to their exchanges and the frames they select to share their messages.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70634/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rose Hendricks receives funding from the US NSF GRFP. </span></em></p>Quirks of human psychology can pose problems for science communicators trying to cover controversial topics. Recognizing what cognitive science knows about how we deal with new information could help.Rose Hendricks, Ph.D. Candidate in Cognitive Science, University of California, San DiegoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/702442016-12-13T17:28:10Z2016-12-13T17:28:10ZWhat does research say about how to effectively communicate about science?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/149954/original/image-20161213-1594-1dl3zpm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1383%2C287%2C4616%2C3260&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Taking stock of what we know works... or not.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=299110817">TV head image via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Truth seems to be an increasingly flexible concept in politics. At least that’s the impression the Oxford English Dictionary gave recently, as it declared “post-truth” the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/16/post-truth-named-2016-word-of-the-year-by-oxford-dictionaries/">2016 Word of the Year</a>. What happens when decisions are based on misleading or blatantly wrong information? The answer is quite simple – our airplanes would be less safe, our medical treatments less effective, our economy less competitive globally, and on and on.</p>
<p>Many scientists and science communicators have grappled with disregard for, or inappropriate use of, scientific evidence for years – especially around contentious issues like the causes of global warming, or the benefits of vaccinating children. A <a href="https://theconversation.com/six-myths-about-vaccination-and-why-theyre-wrong-13556">long debunked study</a> on links between vaccinations and autism, for instance, cost the researcher his medical license but continues to keep vaccination rates lower than they should be.</p>
<p>Only recently, however, have people begun to think systematically about what actually works to promote better public discourse and decision-making around what is sometimes controversial science. Of course scientists would like to rely on evidence, generated by research, to gain insights into how to most effectively convey to others what they know and do. </p>
<p>As it turns out, the science on how to best communicate science across different issues, social settings and audiences has not led to easy-to-follow, concrete recommendations.</p>
<p>About a year ago, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine <a href="http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DBASSE/CurrentProjects/DBASSE_168731">brought together a diverse group of experts and practitioners</a> to address this gap between research and practice. The goal was to apply scientific thinking to the process of how we go about communicating science effectively. Both of us were a part of this group (with Dietram as the vice chair). </p>
<p>The public draft of the group’s findings – “<a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23674/communicating-science-effectively-a-research-agenda">Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda</a>” – has just been published. In it, we take a hard look at what effective science communication means and why it’s important; what makes it so challenging – especially where the science is uncertain or contested; and how researchers and science communicators can increase our knowledge of what works, and under what conditions.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/149935/original/image-20161213-1610-1emkkfm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/149935/original/image-20161213-1610-1emkkfm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/149935/original/image-20161213-1610-1emkkfm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149935/original/image-20161213-1610-1emkkfm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149935/original/image-20161213-1610-1emkkfm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149935/original/image-20161213-1610-1emkkfm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149935/original/image-20161213-1610-1emkkfm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149935/original/image-20161213-1610-1emkkfm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bacteriologists engage with kids at the Wisconsin Science Festival, one way of communicating science to the public.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://photos.uc.wisc.edu/photos/21060/view">Bryce Richter / UW-Madison</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Evidence for effective approaches</h2>
<p>As we discovered, effective science communication – including listening to and engaging with audiences – is particularly complex, and far from simple to study. It’s highly dependent on what is being communicated, its relevance to who’s participating in the conversation and the social and media dynamic around the issues being addressed (especially if those issues or their policy implications are contentious). But it also depends on what people feel and believe is right and the societal or political contexts within which communication and engagement occur. And this makes getting it right and deriving lessons that can be applied across issues and contexts particularly challenging.</p>
<p>Because of this complexity, the practice of science communication (and there are many great practitioners) is currently more of an art than a science. Good communicators – whether reporters, bloggers, scientists or people active on social media and platforms like YouTube – typically learn from others, or through professional training, and often through trial and error. Unfortunately, the social sciences haven’t provided science communicators with concrete, evidence-based guidance on how to communicate more effectively. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/110/Supplement_3">Two</a> <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/111/Supplement_4">earlier</a> NAS meetings identified how diverse the areas of expertise are when it comes to research on science communication. Research spans behavioral economics and sociology along with media and communication studies. They also began to map out what we do and don’t know about what works.</p>
<p>For instance, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the “deficit model” of science communication – the assumption that if we just “fill people up” with science knowledge and understanding, they’ll become increasingly rational decision-makers – <a href="http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1213275110">simply does not work</a>. This is not because people are irrational; rather, we all have our own built-in psychologies of how we make sense of information, and how we weigh different factors when making decisions.</p>
<p>We also know all of us are predisposed to accept, reject or interpret information based on a plethora of mental shortcuts, including a tendency to take on face value information that <a href="https://theconversation.com/confirmation-bias-a-psychological-phenomenon-that-helps-explain-why-pundits-got-it-wrong-68781">seems to confirm our worldview</a>.</p>
<p>And we know how information is presented, or framed, can have a profound impact on how it is interpreted and used. The power of the “<a href="https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/02/10/the-original-frankenfoods/">Frankenfood</a>” frame, for example, used with genetically modified foods, has nothing to do with providing new information. Instead, the term subconsciously connects genetically modified organisms to mental concepts we all share – worrisome ideas about scientists creating unnatural organisms with unintended consequences – and raises moral questions about science going too far.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/149956/original/image-20161213-1600-vqcdqw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/149956/original/image-20161213-1600-vqcdqw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/149956/original/image-20161213-1600-vqcdqw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149956/original/image-20161213-1600-vqcdqw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149956/original/image-20161213-1600-vqcdqw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149956/original/image-20161213-1600-vqcdqw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149956/original/image-20161213-1600-vqcdqw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149956/original/image-20161213-1600-vqcdqw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Grasping scientific evidence has important real-world implications, as when making medical decisions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=284499956">Waiting room image via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Decisions factor in more than facts</h2>
<p>Science communication may involve communicating scientific consensus about, for instance, the benefits and risks of vaccines to patients. Or it may encompass much broader societal debates about the ethical, moral or political questions raised by science.</p>
<p>For example, our ability to edit the genetic code of organisms is developing at breakneck speed. Over the next decade, <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/crispr-15704">CRISPR</a> and similar technologies will have a profound impact on our lives, from how we modify plants and animals and control disease, to how we produce our food, and even how we change our own genetic code as human beings.</p>
<p>But it will also present all of us with questions that cannot be answered with science alone. What does it mean to be human, for instance? Is it ethical to edit the genome of unborn embryos? If people involved in those decisions don’t have the opportunity to grasp the evidence-informed implications of the technology and make informed choices about its development and use, the future becomes little more than a lottery.</p>
<p>For those communicating the science, then, the endeavor comes with some degree of responsibility. Even deciding what information to share, and how to share it, involves personal values, beliefs and perspectives, and can potentially have far-reaching consequences. </p>
<p>There’s an especially high level of ethical responsibility associated with communication designed to influence opinions, behavior and actions. Scientists are well equipped to document the public health risks of lowered <a href="https://theconversation.com/vaccines-back-in-the-headlines-heres-what-the-experts-say-47815">vaccination rates</a>, for example. The question of whether we should mandate vaccinations or <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-mississippi-hasnt-had-measles-in-over-two-decades-37075">remove belief-based exemptions</a>, however, is an inherently political one that scientists alone cannot answer. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ECic_pHHJIc?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Mapping out a better way</h2>
<p>At some level, all science communication has embedded values. Information always comes wrapped in a complex skein of purpose and intent – even when presented as impartial scientific facts. Despite, or maybe because of, this complexity, there remains a need to develop a stronger empirical foundation for effective communication of and about science.</p>
<p>Addressing this, the National Academies draft report makes an extensive number of recommendations. A few in particular stand out:</p>
<ul>
<li>Use a systems approach to guide science communication. In other words, recognize that science communication is part of a larger network of information and influences that affect what people and organizations think and do.</li>
<li>Assess the effectiveness of science communication. Yes, researchers try, but often we still engage in communication first and evaluate later. Better to design the best approach to communication based on empirical insights about both audiences and contexts. Very often, the technical risk that scientists think must be communicated have nothing to do with the hopes or concerns public audiences have. </li>
<li>Get better at meaningful engagement between scientists and others to enable that “<a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/299/5609/977">honest, bidirectional dialogue</a>” about the promises and pitfalls of science that our committee chair <a href="https://www.aaas.org/person/alan-i-leshner">Alan Leshner</a> and others have called for.</li>
<li>Consider social media’s impact – positive and negative.</li>
<li>Work toward better understanding when and how to communicate science around issues that are contentious, or potentially so.</li>
</ul>
<p>Addressing these and other areas is going to take focused research efforts that draw on expertise across many different areas. It’s going to need strategic and serious investment in the “science” of science communication. It will also demand much greater engagement and collaboration between those who study science communication and those who actually do it. And it’ll require serious thinking about why we communicate science, and how we can work respectfully with audiences to ensure that the science we do communicate about is of value to society.</p>
<p>This will not be easy. But the alternative – slipping further into a post-truth world where disdain for evidence creates risks that could be avoided – gives us little option but to dig deeper into the science of science communication, so that science and evidence are more effectively incorporated into the decisions people make.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70244/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Maynard is a member of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on The Science of Science Communication, and is a co-author on the report "Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda."
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dietram Scheufele is vice-chair of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine's Committee on The Science of Science Communication, and is a co-author on the report "Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda."</span></em></p>Now that we’re in a post-truth world, a timely report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine highlights evidence for what works and what doesn’t when talking about science.Andrew Maynard, Director, Risk Innovation Lab, Arizona State UniversityDietram A. Scheufele, Professor of Life Sciences Communication, University of Wisconsin-MadisonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/623872016-08-22T00:21:08Z2016-08-22T00:21:08ZRelationship advice from the government doesn’t help low-income couples – here’s what might<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/134829/original/image-20160819-30366-qb7wzw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">External stressors might have more to do with a low-income couple's success.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/mzn37/277597583">Michael Newman</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Stable, satisfying marriages <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031859">promote physical</a> and <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.20.3.369">mental health</a> for adults <a href="http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00750.x">and their children</a>. However, <a href="http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/09/24/record-share-of-americans-have-never-married/">marriage rates in the United States have dropped</a> over the last few decades as more couples are <a href="http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/files/graphics/MS-2.pdf">choosing to delay marriage</a> or simply <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr064.pdf">live together instead</a>. </p>
<p>These trends are especially pronounced among <a href="http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/11/18/the-decline-of-marriage-and-rise-of-new-families/">low-income couples</a>, and correspond with an <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_12.pdf">increase in the percent of children who are born outside of marriage</a>. Although there has been <a href="http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00750.x">considerable debate</a> about the implications of these trends, some scholars have argued they are problematic given that, statistically, children living with two biological married parents do better (on average) academically, socially and behaviorally compared to other children. </p>
<p>Concerned about the impact of these trends on children’s well-being, the federal government has tried to promote marriage and strengthen couples’ relationships through a <a href="http://archive.acf.hhs.gov/healthymarriage/">range of initiatives</a> over the past two decades.</p>
<p>These bipartisan efforts began in 1996 under President Clinton’s welfare reform legislation. The <a href="https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ193/PLAW-104publ193.pdf">Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act</a> authorized states to pay for marriage and relationship skills programs – including premarital education and marriage mentoring – with federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families money. <a href="http://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/NCFMR/documents/FP/FP-14-02_HMIInitiative.pdf">Funding increased</a> under President George W. Bush’s <a href="http://archive.acf.hhs.gov/healthymarriage/about/mission.html#background">Healthy Marriage Initiative</a> and continued under President Obama. Currently the Department of Health and Human Services supports these kinds of efforts through the <a href="https://www.healthymarriageandfamilies.org/">National Resource Center for Healthy Marriage and Families</a>. All told, hundreds of millions of dollars have been set aside for states to administer marriage programs.</p>
<p>With so much time and money spent on these programs to date, are the relationships of low-income Americans in better shape than they would have been without them? What’s the evidence from social science research on what really strengthens couples’ relationships? </p>
<h2>Teaching relationship skills</h2>
<p>Relationship education programs are the cornerstone of these government efforts to strengthen low-income Americans’ relationships. These federally funded programs focus on teaching couples new skills to improve their relationships, targeting areas like healthy communication, showing affection and conflict management.</p>
<p>Relationship education has been around for several decades, and <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012584">evidence from trials of primarily middle-class white couples</a> had shown modest results. The <a href="http://archive.acf.hhs.gov/healthymarriage/about/mission.html#ms">hope of the federal initiatives</a> was that by increasing access to these types of programs among low-income couples, their relationships would benefit and so would their children. </p>
<p>To test the effectiveness of relationship education programs, starting in 2002 the government funded the two largest randomized controlled trials on the issue ever conducted. The first, <a href="http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/bsf_36_mo_impact_exec_summ.pdf">Building Strong Families</a>, included unmarried low-income couples who were expecting or just had a baby. The second, <a href="http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/shm2013_30_month_impact_reportrev2.pdf">Supporting Healthy Marriage</a>, focused on married low-income couples who had been married for an average of six years. Other than these differences in the type of couples involved, the evaluations were set up to be similar.</p>
<p>Researchers randomly assigned thousands of couples either to receive relationship education or to receive no services as part of the control group. Then couples were assessed twice to examine how effective the program was: once after about a year, and a second time about three years later. The programs evaluated a host of outcomes, including couples’ communication and relationship satisfaction, marriage rates and whether the couple was still together.</p>
<p>Even though couples in the control condition received no treatment at all, results from both groups were weaker than anticipated. The unmarried couples who participated in Building Strong Families were no more likely to be married or to report higher-quality relationships. The more established couples who participated in Supporting Healthy Marriage showed some small benefits for relationship satisfaction and their communication, but were no more likely to be together than couples in the control group. The benefits from the programs were especially small when considering their costs, which averaged between <a href="http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/shm2013_30_month_impact_reportrev2.pdf">US$9,000</a> and <a href="http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/bsf_36_mo_impact_exec_summ.pdf">$11,000</a> per couple.</p>
<p>What went wrong? Why didn’t these programs help as much as expected? </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/134835/original/image-20160819-30387-sseidd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/134835/original/image-20160819-30387-sseidd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/134835/original/image-20160819-30387-sseidd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/134835/original/image-20160819-30387-sseidd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/134835/original/image-20160819-30387-sseidd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/134835/original/image-20160819-30387-sseidd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/134835/original/image-20160819-30387-sseidd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/134835/original/image-20160819-30387-sseidd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Communication training isn’t all it takes to keep marriages going.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=133609583">Couple image via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>More to marriage than communication</h2>
<p>In the years since these programs were first developed, researchers have devoted more attention to understanding low-income couples’ relationships.</p>
<p>Our own research has focused on newlywed couples living in low-income neighborhoods in Los Angeles. In a <a href="http://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12301">recent study</a>, we examined how these couples’ marriages changed over time, and what predicted changes in couples’ marital satisfaction.</p>
<p>We visited couples in their homes four times over the first three years of marriage. During these visits, couples reported how happy they were with their marriage, and participated in conversations about issues in their marriage. These ran the gamut: from management of money, to division of chores, to children. </p>
<p>We were interested in how couples communicated during these conversations, in keeping with the emphasis on communication in the relationship education programs supported by the recent federal initiatives. We considered positive communication to reflect behaviors like positive mood, warmth, humor and responsiveness. On the flip side, contempt, denial, dominance and hostility would be reflected as negative communication. </p>
<p>As we expected, communication and relationship satisfaction over time were associated: At any one of our four assessment points, couples who communicated better – with more positivity and less acrimony – tended to be happier in their marriages. </p>
<p>Prediction, however, was much harder to come by. The quality of their communication at any one point in time did not tell us much about which couples would become more or less happy over time. So happier couples did communicate better, but their mode of communication wasn’t the reason they were happier.</p>
<p>Communication, it seems, may not be the main driver of relationship satisfaction, at least among couples living with low incomes. To understand what might matter more, we asked the couples themselves about the <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/fam0000158">biggest sources of disagreement</a> in their marriages. They reported that management of money – things like paying bills or not having enough money to both pay for baby items and go out – was their most salient problem. Other issues like household chores, decisions about leisure time, their in-laws and children followed. Communication could be a problem too, but they didn’t identify it as nearly as much of a big deal as these other areas. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/134839/original/image-20160819-30409-1nx5vva.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/134839/original/image-20160819-30409-1nx5vva.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/134839/original/image-20160819-30409-1nx5vva.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/134839/original/image-20160819-30409-1nx5vva.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/134839/original/image-20160819-30409-1nx5vva.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/134839/original/image-20160819-30409-1nx5vva.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/134839/original/image-20160819-30409-1nx5vva.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/134839/original/image-20160819-30409-1nx5vva.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">First things first; we’ve got bills to pay.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=231990565">Bills image via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Dealing with the big picture first</h2>
<p>These studies, <a href="http://doi.org/10.1037/a0031104">among many others</a>, highlight a deceptively simple point: Partners living with low incomes are likely to <a href="http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.00977.x">struggle because they face challenges outside of their marriage</a>. Healthy communication of the sort encouraged in relationship education does go hand-in-hand with how couples feel about their relationship, but outside factors may be more immediately pressing and need more attention. Families who are struggling to afford everyday expenses may find it difficult to prioritize spending meaningful time with a partner.</p>
<p>External stressors (like finances) can place a <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.05.013">tremendous burden on couples’ relationships</a> for two reasons: They create more problems for them to deal with (like money management), and they limit couples’ capacity to solve these problems.</p>
<p>To help low-income couples’ relationships, we may need policies and programs that reduce stress directly, such as assistance with child care, finances or job training. Admittedly, these types of strategies are not typically thought of as being part of programs to help couples. But, by targeting the relationship problems identified by low-income couples themselves, we might be able to provide them with some much-needed relief. Helping couples square away some of these immediate problems might allow them to devote more time and energy to each other, their relationship and their children.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62387/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Justin Lavner's research has been supported by funding from the National Science Foundation. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Benjamin Karney is a Professor of Social Psychology at UCLA and an Adjunct Behavioral Scientist with the RAND Corporation. His work has been funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Defense.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Thomas Bradbury served as a paid expert consultant on the Building Strong Families and Strengthening Healthy Marriages projects. His research at UCLA has been supported by grants from the National Science Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and the National Institute of Mental Health, and he currently collaborates on projects supported by grants from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.</span></em></p>Relationship education programs are meant to strengthen low-income couples, with the idea children would benefit. But focusing on communication skills overlooks what really matters to these Americans.Justin Lavner, Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of GeorgiaBenjamin Karney, Professor of Social Psychology, University of California, Los AngelesThomas Bradbury, Professor of Psychology, University of California, Los AngelesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/596432016-05-31T01:04:28Z2016-05-31T01:04:28ZScience communication training should be about more than just how to transmit knowledge<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124492/original/image-20160530-7687-9f3jwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Scientists need to learn how to hit other communication goals.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=313119476">Talking image via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>For some scientists, communicating effectively with the public seems to come naturally. Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson currently has more than <a href="https://twitter.com/neiltyson">five million Twitter followers</a>. Astronomer <a href="http://www.carlsagan.com/">Carl Sagan</a> enraptured audiences for decades as a ubiquitous cosmic sage on American televisions. And Stephen Jay Gould’s public visibility was such that he voiced an animated version of himself on “The Simpsons.” But, for most scientists, outward-facing communication is not something they’ve typically thought about much… let alone sought to cultivate. </p>
<p>But times change. Leaders in the scientific community are increasingly calling on their scientist colleagues to <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa7477">meaningfully engage with their fellow citizens</a>. The hope is that such interactions can improve the science-society relationship at a time when we are confronting a growing list of high-stakes, high-controversy issues including climate change, synthetic biology and epigenetics. </p>
<p>The gauntlet has been issued, but can scientists meet it?</p>
<p>The answer to that question largely depends on one key group: professional science communication trainers who offer formalized guidance designed to improve scientists’ public communication efforts. There’s a wellspring of science communication programs, among them the <a href="http://www.centerforcommunicatingscience.org/">Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science</a>, the <a href="http://www.aaas.org/pes/">Center for Public Engagement with Science & Technology</a> at the <a href="http://www.aaas.org/">American Association for the Advancement of Science</a> and the <a href="http://www.compassonline.org/">COMPASS Science Communication</a>. Programs like these typically provide communication courses of a half-day up to a week or more. Some organizations also employ in-house personnel to train their scientists to communicate.</p>
<p>Given the important role these training programs now play in the public communication of science, we sought to examine their work. Broadly, we were looking for commonalities in their efforts and experiences, and we wanted to spot possible opportunities for their growth. We were especially interested in something we view as being critical to effective public engagement: helping scientists identify and try to achieve specific communication goals. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124388/original/image-20160529-859-a4ir0j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124388/original/image-20160529-859-a4ir0j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124388/original/image-20160529-859-a4ir0j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124388/original/image-20160529-859-a4ir0j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124388/original/image-20160529-859-a4ir0j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124388/original/image-20160529-859-a4ir0j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124388/original/image-20160529-859-a4ir0j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124388/original/image-20160529-859-a4ir0j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Communication trainers do valuable work, helping scientists figure out how to engage about their research.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ugacommunications/26132960546">UGA College of Ag & Environmental Sciences - OCCS</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What trainers focus on</h2>
<p>In late 2014, we conducted a <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1075547016645640">set of 24 interviews</a> with science communication trainers from across the United States. Ours is the first published study examining this important community. We found that much of the training they provided focused on helping scientists share their research in clear ways that would increase knowledge.</p>
<p>This is consistent with what scientists have told us in surveys: their main objective in communicating their work is to <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148867">inform the public about science and correct misinformation</a>.</p>
<p>Sharing knowledge will always be a central component of science communication – knowledge generation is, after all, the main enterprise of science. And relaying knowledge makes up the bulk of the science journalism the public encounters through the media – stories about new discoveries and the latest research. </p>
<p>But there are other reasons scientists might want to communicate with the general public. We call these “nonknowledge objectives” – things like fostering excitement about science, building trust in the scientific community, or reframing how people think about certain issues. These objectives are different from a biologist wanting to share with a listener the details on her research on bird migration, for instance. They’re more about people, and forging relationships.</p>
<p>We’ve found that these sorts of nonknowledge goals have a <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148867">relatively lower priority</a> for scientists compared to the desire to get information across about their direct scientific work. Not surprisingly, only a few of the trainers we interviewed indicated that, at that time, they were explicitly trying to help scientists achieve these other kinds of nonknowledge objectives.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, the trainers told us they believed many of the scientists they train want to communicate to help raise public support for science in general and because they think their research will help people see the value in specific policy options.</p>
<p>Our work suggests that scientists and the trainers they work with often focus primarily on the successful transmission of science information, leaving those other objectives to fall into place. But there’s a problem with that logic. Decades of science communication research – a research area now commonly referred to as <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414635111">the science of science communication</a> – show that fostering positive views about science requires more than just trying to <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963662506070159">correct deficits in public knowledge</a>. </p>
<h2>Matching the training to the ultimate goal</h2>
<p>It may be useful to consider alternatives (or additions) to the character of the current training landscape. The emphasis now is on teaching scientists key journalism skills to help them share information more effectively – by, for instance, distilling jargon-free messages. Training typically places limited emphasis on whether sharing that information will have the desired effect. </p>
<p>Instead, given scientists’ goals, training could help scientists avoid doing things that have little potential for impact or, worse, actually diminish people’s views of science.</p>
<p>Extensive research shows that we tend to <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317505111">trust people we judge to be warm and caring</a> because they seem less likely to want to do us harm. With that in mind, more training could explicitly help scientists avoid doing the types of things that might convey a cold demeanor. For example, no matter how accurate a scientist’s argument may be, if communicated rudely it will likely miss its mark. Worse still, it may generate negative feelings that a recipient could then generalize more broadly to the scientific community.</p>
<p>Related research on what people <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1075547009358624">perceive to be fair or not</a> when it comes to making important decisions could also inform communication training. Studies emphasize the potential strategic value of making sure people feel like they’re being listened to and treated with respect. Imagine, for example, how you’d feel if a doctor didn’t give you a genuine chance to share your personal experiences with an ailment. </p>
<p>Similarly, given what we know about the value of <a href="http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/25447/title/The-Future-of-Public-Engagement/">framing</a>, perhaps more training should help scientists find ways to talk about issues that are consistent with the scientists’ work but that are also consistent with the priorities or worldviews of the people with whom they are speaking. For example, given the value that people put on their families’ health, it may make sense to <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0513-6">frame climate change in terms of health issues</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124390/original/image-20160529-883-1tmmfr3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124390/original/image-20160529-883-1tmmfr3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124390/original/image-20160529-883-1tmmfr3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124390/original/image-20160529-883-1tmmfr3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124390/original/image-20160529-883-1tmmfr3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124390/original/image-20160529-883-1tmmfr3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124390/original/image-20160529-883-1tmmfr3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124390/original/image-20160529-883-1tmmfr3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Communication is about more than just transferring information.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/chipgriffin/2207585271">Chip Griffin</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Challenges to getting more strategic</h2>
<p>There are at least two challenges associated with suggesting a more strategic approach to science communication.</p>
<p>First, it is easier to communicate in ways that come naturally and simply hope for the best.</p>
<p>Second, there is a danger that some people will misconstrue being strategic as being dishonest. On the contrary, effective strategic communication rests on authenticity, just like science. Science communicators should never do things like pretend to be warm, fake listening or frame things in ways they don’t think are appropriate.</p>
<p>The point is that by thinking strategically, we can begin to recognize that our communication choices – whether it’s leaving time after a talk for real discussion, calling those with whom we disagree ugly names or framing every disagreement as a war – have consequences. </p>
<p>It also seems clear that science communicators and communication trainers – who, in our experience, provide outstanding training in key skills – are already focusing on certain tactics that affect things like trust without making the explicit connection. For example, just using accessible language and speaking without jargon might communicate that scientists care enough about those with whom they are speaking to accommodate them. The power of telling stories isn’t just a better way to convey information; it’s a social act with social consequences.</p>
<p>Effective public engagement involves high-quality interactions between people. This means that many of the actual effects are likely to be due to the quality of the relationships between participants, including scientists and nonscientists. Content matters, of course, but not unless a healthy dynamic for information exchange is established. </p>
<p>The science communication training community is already doing great work. Ultimately, as trainers and scientists get more strategic in their science communication, it will help justify the time and resources it takes to communicate effectively. And they can forgo activities that seem unlikely to have an impact.</p>
<p><em>This article has been updated on July 15, 2016 with a corrected name for COMPASS Science Communication.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59643/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF, Grant AISL 14241214-421723. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.</span></em></p>Broader goals like building trust, fostering excitement about science and influencing policy decisions don’t necessarily just fall into place when researchers focus only on describing their work.John C. Besley, Associate Professor of Advertising and Public Relations, Michigan State UniversityAnthony Dudo, Assistant Professor of Advertising and Public Relations, The University of Texas at AustinLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/364852015-07-14T02:49:03Z2015-07-14T02:49:03ZCould early infant screening and intervention help prevent autism?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/88282/original/image-20150714-11831-13rf0rn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Early interventions can help children with autism build social and communication skills.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">father lifting child, from shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Among the many available therapies and early interventions for children with autism, only a few are backed up with <a href="https://theconversation.com/autism-therapies-need-more-than-just-compassion-30462">solid scientific evidence</a>. But here’s some good news: recently, the quality of autism early intervention research has improved significantly.</p>
<p>A number of randomised controlled trials – the gold standard scientific method for testing whether a treatment works – show various <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(10)60587-9/abstract">parent-training</a> and <a href="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/1/e17.abstract">therapist-delivered</a> interventions can help young children with autism to build skills for social communication and independent living.</p>
<p>In most of the Western world, autism is diagnosed <a href="http://otarc.blogs.latrobe.edu.au/mapping-diagnoses-in-australia/">between the ages of two and five</a> when behavioural symptoms have become clear. But could waiting until early childhood mean we’re missing a valuable opportunity for early intervention? </p>
<h2>Earlier and earlier</h2>
<p>We know that the earlier an intervention begins, the greater the chance we have for positive outcomes. This is because the brains of young children are developing rapidly and can adapt to new <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14521198">learning experiences</a>.</p>
<p>As a result, several research groups around the world have started exploring very early intervention for infants who are at high risk of developing autism. These include infants who show early signs of autism and the infant siblings of children with a diagnosis, who have about a <a href="https://theconversation.com/one-in-five-risk-of-sibling-autism-2903">20% chance</a> of also developing autism (compared to the general <a href="http://journals.lww.com/jrnldbp/Abstract/2010/06000/Prospective_Identification_of_Autism_Spectrum.3.aspx">population risk of around 1%</a>).</p>
<p>Late in 2014, <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10803-014-2202-y">a US-based team reported</a> that a parent-training intervention seemed to improve behaviours related to autism in a small group of infants. The researchers enrolled children who were showing early signs of autism – reduced motivation and skills for interacting with others – and followed them until they were three years old, which is when autism can be confidently diagnosed or ruled out.</p>
<p>While almost all children in this study showed good outcomes, the sample size was very small (seven children completed the therapy). Another limitation was that the researchers did not randomly allocate infants to the therapy group, so we can’t be sure the observed benefits were due to participating in the therapy.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, the project was a good proof-of-concept study, a first stab at showing that very early intervention for infants at risk of autism might be worthwhile.</p>
<h2>Another step forward</h2>
<p>Early in 2015, <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366(14)00091-1/abstract">a UK-based research team reported</a> on another very early intervention; this time tested among “high-risk” infant siblings. This study used the most rigorous scientific design, randomly allocating 54 parents and their infants to trial the new intervention or to continue without any specific therapy.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/88286/original/image-20150714-11804-14djj7n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/88286/original/image-20150714-11804-14djj7n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/88286/original/image-20150714-11804-14djj7n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/88286/original/image-20150714-11804-14djj7n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/88286/original/image-20150714-11804-14djj7n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/88286/original/image-20150714-11804-14djj7n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/88286/original/image-20150714-11804-14djj7n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Better attention control is shown in infants who trialled early intervention therapies.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/treehouse1977/3791968674/in/photolist-6M5Qbf-si3g1J-5R1Lm6-7ajiEE-6jh7Qq-5v75TR-dL4pVp-6hPkpU-5jdgLa-fosKic-5KhVf3-8rLtFZ-ecwwDt-kMsLDD-8P76u6-oYztVk-kMrRDx-oEYzX3-6ibfTZ-kMsyFv-kMsMXF-6rDoSM-6rHx8U-6rDp5K-6rHw6b-9TCoEs-6qMwC9-6M1Ehz-aR2d7-6M5PKh-dW8cFt-qs4VL4-6xREPq-6xRDt7-6qMwT7-6qHkpk-6pEo9f-6u55gK-6ujMDn-v8Ddm-6ujMwg-dKxZsC-p2Cc9s-6xMvHP-6xMtn2-v8Ddu-v8Ddx-6xRC6o-6xRDMQ-6xRErb">Jim Champion/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So far, these infants have only been followed to 14 months of age, which is not old enough to know whether any have developed autism. But because the researchers took several different measures of autism “risk”, the early trial results look promising.</p>
<p>The group of infants who received the new therapy tended to show improvements in social behaviour compared to those who had no specific therapy. They seemed to pay more attention to their parents during free play time, which is important because limited attention to adults is a good <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcpp.12032/abstract">early sign of emerging autism</a>. </p>
<p>They were also rated as somewhat more social during a play-based assessment with an unfamiliar adult. Scores on <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10803-007-0440-y">this measure</a> have previously been linked with greater chance of autism.</p>
<p>Infants who trialled the therapy showed improvements on a measure of attention control (or speed of processing visual information). To test this, images appear rapidly on a computer screen and researchers use eye-tracking technology to see how quickly infants can switch from looking at one image to another. Again, infants later diagnosed with autism have previously been shown to <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006322312010864">struggle with this task</a>.</p>
<p>This study is a pilot trial with a relatively small sample of participating families, but the researchers hope to show that changing early “risk” behaviours might prevent children from developing the full syndrome of autism symptoms and reduce their level of associated disability. </p>
<p>The infants who took part in it are not yet old enough to confirm or rule out autism. And because the researchers selected and enrolled infants who had an older sibling with autism, most (around 80%) are unlikely to develop autism even without any therapy.</p>
<h2>Where is autism intervention science heading?</h2>
<p>These two recent studies and a <a href="http://www.hindawi.com/journals/aurt/2015/386951/">handful of others</a> present exciting work at the cutting edge of autism early-intervention science. Some might even call this prevention science. But, so far, this research is at proof-of-concept or pilot stage. There’s still a way to go. </p>
<p>Nonetheless, these early results suggest that therapy in the first year of life might help children who are at risk of autism. Several types of therapy show potential for supporting infants to develop and practise early social skills – paying attention to and communicating with others – which present real challenges for children with autism.</p>
<p>Follow-up work building on these early studies is underway. But what has already emerged from early-intervention science is that the disability associated with autism doesn’t need to be a lifelong burden. Therapy during the early years, and ongoing education and support throughout childhood and adulthood, can promote <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-employing-autistic-people-makes-good-business-sense-39948">positive outcomes</a> for people with autism spectrum disorders.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/36485/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kristelle Hudry receives funding from the Building Healthy Communities Research Focus Area (BHC RFA) at La Trobe University.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Whitehouse receives funding from the NHMRC, ARC and the Autism CRC.</span></em></p>Autism is usually diagnosed between the ages of two and five. But studies show therapies delivered earlier in childhood could help children at risk of developing autism.Kristelle Hudry, Senior Lecturer in Developmental Psychology, La Trobe UniversityAndrew Whitehouse, Winthrop Professor, Telethon Kids Institute, The University of Western AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.