Skip to main content

Engaging Scientists in Public Discourse

Presenting Research and Data

We live in the era of social media, and unfortunately, these sort of platforms are the sources that the vast majority of people rely on today. Many people will just believe whatever they see when scrolling down their timelines. Much of the information we are presented with in these sort of setting is largely falsified, and that is something that needs to be fixed.

Scientists are required to conduct efficient research and present the data from the results in the most efficient, unbiased way possible. By presenting fabricated information, this misleads the public and can be very detrimental to society and science as a whole, resulting in a very poor relationship between scientists and the public.

Science Panel

Recently I was able to listen to some of the things that scientist here at Appalachian State University had to offer. The panel consisted of three different geologists by the names of Dr. Carmichael, Dr. Levine and Dr. Marshall, all having their own specialities, as well as an anthropologist by the name of Dr. Kissel and a Biologist by the name of Dr. Bellemer. All of them were very friendly people and very well spoken in their specific fields. They all seemed to stress a great importance in the way information is presented, especially to maintain their credibility in the scientific community. One thing I found very interesting was that roughly 95% of Dr. Bellemer's research is conducted by his students; he stressed to me how important his students were to his work and how his experiments would most likely not make significant progress if it weren't for them.

Conclusion

Presenting the public with fabricated information does nothing but harm the scientific community as well as mislead the public. Using social media does seem to be the most effective platform for the public to listen, but the way it is used must be changed. Scientists must clearly communicate their results in an unbiased manner, and present the information in a way that the common person can understand without being misleading.

Comments

  1. Good post. I agree that social media is how the general public gets their information, and I agree that that can be very problematic. As well as the fact that some of the information that people find on social media can be completely incorrect. Again, good post, well said.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good job on this post David! A couple of things to edit:
    -Where you keep saying "By the name of..." that sounds a bit weird. Try rewording that section where you introduce the scientists. Also include their first names (if you don't know them look them up online).
    -The first sentence under Science Panel subheading could be reworded too. Where you refer to what "scientists had to offer", it sort of sounds like it's the main/ only thing these scientists are responsible for, or like they are in a career fair promoting something. Try changing the sentence to include talking about their research with the general public.
    -To make your blog post more interactive, include a photo/ image (plus source) and maybe some external links (eg. make the scientist names link to external websites where the reader can find more information about their research for example).

    ReplyDelete
  3. David, I completely agree that social media has a damaging affect on public perception if not presented properly. I too was very surprised that so much research is done by students here at App. Very interesting post & keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree that social media can be a great tool to use to keep the public knowledgeable about science if it is used correctly. I also found it very interesting that a majority of Dr. Bellemer's reasearch is conducted by his students so they can gain hands on experience.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Good Graphs vs. Bad Graphs

The general public tends to trust the numbers behind things; statistics are key to understanding how drastic a particular situation is or can be. But the fact of the matter is that many people manipulate their statistics in order to appeal to their own argument. Maybe not changing the numbers themselves, but manipulating the way in which they are presented in order to get the response they are looking for. In this particular post, I'm going to look at how certain graphs and statistics can be manipulated to look good or bad to the audience. In this case, we will be looking at climate change. Let's start with a good example. Above is a graph depicting the levels of carbon dioxide it the atmosphere over thousands of years. The consistency of the graph remains in tact, with the Y-Axis increasing by 40 parts per million between each line, and with the X-Axis decreasing by 50 (thousands of years before today) by each line. We are clearly able to determine that the carbon diox...