Legislators make policy based on the information at hand, which isn’t always the latest scientific findings.
Stuart Cahill/Boston Herald via Getty Images
Researchers want real-world impact. Lawmakers want programs that work. The public wants to benefit from taxpayer-funded research. Building a bridge from academia to legislatures is key to all three.
To build trust with an audience, scientists must demonstrate that they are competent experts. But they must also come across as warm, caring and human.
New research shows the choices we make, and our perceptions of the world, are biased by our initial impressions.
As the pandemic has progressed, so has scientists’ understanding of why masks matter and how best to protect against COVID.
James D. Morgan/Getty Images
Good science doesn’t eliminate uncertainty: it explains it.
These psychological tendencies explain why an onslaught of facts won’t necessarily change anyone’s mind.
Francesco Carta fotografo/Moment via Getty Images
Cognitive shortcuts help you efficiently move through a complicated world. But they come with an unwelcome side effect: Facts aren’t necessarily enough to change your mind.
The scientific evidence supports the use of exercise rehabilitation, where you become an active participant in the treatment. Passive therapies like massage won’t help in the long run.
Scientists talk about their research because they want their expertise to guide real-world decisions.
Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images
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.
Keeping your equilibrium can be a challenge in times of uncertainty.
Léonard Cotte/Unsplash
Craig Polizzi, Binghamton University, State University of New York e Steven Jay Lynn, Binghamton University, State University of New York
As the pandemic drags on, uncertainty and fears about health and safety mix with confusion and challenges tied to re-opening society. You need flexibility when picking your coping strategies.
The more politicized an issue, the harder it is for people to absorb contradictory evidence.
Drew Angerer/Getty Images News via Getty Images
Whether in situations relating to scientific consensus, economic history or current political events, denialism has its roots in what psychologists call ‘motivated reasoning.’
A crop circle in Switzerland.
Jabberocky/Wikimedia Commons
The internet has allowed pseudoscience to flourish. Artificial intelligence could help steer people away from the bad information.
Medical workers in health crisis zones need access to research evidence to inform decisions. Above, workers at a temporary hospital for COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China on Feb. 21, 2020.
Chinatopix via AP, File
In a health crisis, decisions about treatment and containment must be made quickly. It’s crucial those decisions be based on research evidence, but fast and easy access is not always available.
Whether in situations relating to scientific consensus, economic history or current political events, denialism has its roots in what psychologists call ‘motivated reasoning.’
With so much research, data and evidence in the world, it’s tough to pull it together in a useful way.
Shutterstock
Rwanda’s vaccination programme for girls against HPV, the most common sexually transmitted disease was a huge success, thanks to implementation science.