I wrote yesterday about that new paper finding that a science-communication course doesn't improve students' science communication. The replies (on the post, and on Twitter) are interesting! (1/6)
In a nutshell, everyone agrees the study must be wrong. (It's pretty clear that the authors hope everyone is right about this, but they can't figure out how). (2/6)
Like the authors, I hope the study is wrong. But we do science, right? We need to consider the fact that the world isn't the way we hope it is. (3/6)
Some of the suggestions people bring up are plausible and important - and in general, those are ones the authors considered in the paper. Others are.... creative. (4/6)
I think it's revealing about the amount of mental gymnastics we're willing to do to preserve a favourite hypothesis, especially when the alternative is (to be honest) kind of dispiriting. (5/6)
Anyway, you can read the post: https://scientistseessquirrel.wordpress.com/2021/04/27/is-science-communication-unteachable/, and even better, you can read the paper (6/6,fin)
Is science communication unteachable?
Have you ever read a scientific paper that simultaneously left you in deep admiration, but also crushed? I have – just now. It’s Rubega et al. 2021, “Assessment by audiences shows little effect of…https://scientistseessquirrel.wordpress.com/2021/04/27/is-science-communication-unteachable/