Excited to share part two of our #jargon study! Here, we find that jargon in science messages affects individuals& #39; perceptions of themselves - making them feel like they aren& #39;t "science people" and decreasing interest in and knowledge about science/tech https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0261927X20902177">https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.11...

We link these effects to the mechanism of metacognition/processing fluency. Importantly, we show that our experience with processing a message can be used to make inferences about ourselves - here, that because we experience difficulty, we must not be meant for science.

Extending on the first part of this study, below, we find that jargon makes people think 1) topics are more risky and less likely to support them and 2) messages aren& #39;t meant for someone like them, reducing their interest and perceived knowledge in an area https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0963662519865687">https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/1...

Together, we suggest that jargon and other language features that reduce processing fluency should be avoided, particularly in areas where communicators want to increase engagement and support.

Of course, none of this would be possible without the team of people on this project, including @hcshulman, Graham Dixon, and @ColonAmill. Check it out! #phdchat #AcademicChatter #AcademicTwitter #jargon #health #science #scicomm #polcomm