• Written by Robert Wyss, Professor Emeritus of Journalism, University of Connecticut
Scientists need to become better communicators, but it's hard to measure whether training works

Science is essential to solving many of society’s biggest problems, but it doesn’t always find a receptive audience. Today, when curbing COVID-19 requires hundreds of millions of Americans to get vaccinated, it’s more urgent than ever for scientists to be able to communicate effectively with the public.

The challenge was clear long before the pandemic. Scientists began to realize they needed to do better at explaining their findings in the 1990s, after fossil fuel corporations and conservative politicians rejected evidence[1] that the globe was warming at an alarming rate. In response, a range of programs sprang up that were designed to teach everyone, from veteran scientists to young graduate students, how to better communicate their often arcane and confusing research.

Today there’s an expanding number of science communication training programs that last anywhere from a few hours to several months. Techniques range from storytelling[2] and improvisation[3] to coaching through simulated interviews[4] with journalists and public relations specialists. Yet voices opposed to mainstream scientific views remain a powerful force in the U.S.[5].

We have taught science communication courses[6] for more than a decade at the University of Connecticut[7]. Margaret Rubega[8] talks regularly to the press as the Connecticut state ornithologist and has won a universitywide teaching award. Robert Capers[9] is a Pulitzer Prize-winning former journalist and botanist. Robert Wyss[10] is a journalist who reported on environmental issues for decades and authored a book on environmental journalism.

All of us wanted to know more about what really helps scientists talk to the public. What we found in a recent study[11] funded by the National Science Foundation surprised us, and convinced us that it’s time to rethink how we assess whether science communication training works.

Science communication methods and voices are evolving quickly in today’s complex media environment.

Practice makes … not much difference

Our investigation began by recruiting graduate STEM students to semesterlong science communication courses that featured lectures, discussion, exercises and mock journalism interviews. Every student participated in repeated interviews that we video-recorded and then reviewed in class. We wanted to see how well they could talk clearly and engagingly about their work on topics in science, technology, engineering and medicine.

At the end of the semester our written surveys drew strong praise from the students. “The interviews forced us to put ourselves out there,” said one student, “to make mistakes, analyze them and then reflect on how to improve in the future.”

Such comments were not surprising. Most science communication training programs query participants and get positive responses. But more probing research has shown that students consistently overestimate how well they perform[12].

Our research was designed to go further. Over three years we video-recorded students explaining a scientific concept at the beginning of the course and then again at the end. Then we showed these videos, along with videos made by a control group of students who did not receive science communication training, to hundreds of undergraduate students.

We asked the undergraduates to rate the students they saw in the videos on various communication skills. The results showed that students who had taken the training courses did no better communicating with the undergrads than did the students who had had no training.

Furthermore, the trained students received only slightly higher scores after taking the course than they did at the beginning. And the untrained students in our control group showed an equal – minimal – improvement in scores.

In sum, students who took our communication training class received lots of instruction, active practice and direct analysis of what to do differently. However, the undergraduates who did the ratings did not appear to perceive any difference between students who took the training course and others who did not.

Looking for a jump-start

We were surprised by these findings. Were we the worst science communication teachers working?

Perhaps, but that would be surprising too, given the varied experiences we brought to this effort. An educational consultant oversaw our curriculum, and our research team included communications specialist Anne Oeldorf-Hirsch[13]; postdoctoral researcher Kevin Burgio[14]; and statistician A. Andrew MacDonald at Montreal University.

Our biggest question was what we could conclude from this study about the range of training approaches in science communication. If a 15-week, three-credit course doesn’t change communication behavior much, how much can scientists expect to gain from shorter trainings, such as the kind of singular sessions frequently offered at conferences?

We don’t believe our results show that science communication training is worthless. Students unquestionably leave our courses much more aware of the pitfalls of using jargon, speaking in complex sentences and talking more about the caveats than about the bottom line. It just appears that knowledge doesn’t translate to enough of a change in their use of jargon, complex sentences and ability to get to the point to change how audiences score them.

UC Davis plant biology graduate student Katie Murphy, winner of the University of California’s 2019 Grad Slam scholarly communication contest, gives a three-minute overview of her research.

We suspect that what students need is much, much more active practice than even a full-semester course gives them. As science writer Malcolm Gladwell has famously pointed out, it can require 10,000 hours of practice[15] to become skilled at complex tasks.

The big challenge in assessing different kinds of science communication training is tracking how skills improve over the long term. Perhaps more importantly, we’d like to know whether there’s any way to help scientists improve more quickly.

The National Science Foundation currently requires every scientist who receives a federal grant to explain how that research will affect the public[16], including plans for communicating the results. Perhaps the NSF and other funders of science communication training should require rigorous assessments of the training they are paying for.

At the very least, we hope our research generates discussion among scientists, journalists and those interested in public science literacy. Two European scholars recently issued a similar call for more rigorous research on what actually works in science communication, and for a serious dialog about how to use that evidence to improve the practice of communication[17].

Clearly, organizations that train scientists have to do more than just ask participants in a class whether they learned anything. Our study showed that there’s a need for rigorous methods to assess communication training programs. Without them, trainers can’t tell whether they are just wasting their time.

[Understand new developments in science, health and technology, each week. Subscribe to The Conversation’s science newsletter[18].]


  1. ^ rejected evidence (
  2. ^ storytelling (
  3. ^ improvisation (
  4. ^ coaching through simulated interviews (
  5. ^ a powerful force in the U.S. (
  6. ^ science communication courses (
  7. ^ University of Connecticut (
  8. ^ Margaret Rubega (
  9. ^ Robert Capers (
  10. ^ Robert Wyss (
  11. ^ recent study (
  12. ^ overestimate how well they perform (
  13. ^ Anne Oeldorf-Hirsch (
  14. ^ Kevin Burgio (
  15. ^ 10,000 hours of practice (
  16. ^ how that research will affect the public (
  17. ^ improve the practice of communication (
  18. ^ Subscribe to The Conversation’s science newsletter (

Authors: Robert Wyss, Professor Emeritus of Journalism, University of Connecticut

Read more

Metropolitan republishes selected articles from The Conversation USA with permission

Visit The Conversation to see more

Entertainment News

Ny’a: My Musical Journey

It’s been such an amazing musical journey. Starting my career in the late 1990’s and selling over 500,000 copies of my debut album “Embrace” worldwide was the beginning of it all.  It was an incredible start of my career. It was a whirlwind for m...

Ny’a - avatar Ny’a

Pro Tips for Gambling Online

While online gambling sounds like an entertaining thing to spend your afternoons playing, it is also serious business for professional players. Those that take gambling seriously know all the tips and tricks that make a good game. Not only do the...

News Co - avatar News Co

The New Art: Balancing Human and Synth in Music Creation

It’s a great time to be alive for indie music makers! There are many of us, maybe including you, who are creating good music out there, armed with nothing but our own ingenuity and the few dollars in our shallow pockets. But what’s the best way to ...

Angela Predhomme - avatar Angela Predhomme

An unstoppable force in indie R&B music since her re-emergence in 2015, Ny’a releases “Waiting”

An unstoppable force in indie R&B music since her re-emergence in 2015, Ny’a has topped the World Indie and Euro Indie Charts countless times, hit the R&B Soul Chart and Club Music Chart Top 20 and became the first artist since Janet Jack...

News Co - avatar News Co

An Aussie Band Breaks Into The US Music Market

AN AUSTRALIAN BAND’S STEPS TAKEN TRYING TO BREAK INTO THE US MARKET By skinsNbones The steps skinsNbones have taken as a band trying to break into the music market haven’t been taken in the traditional Australian way. We didn’t have the opportun...

News Co Media - avatar News Co Media


After a difficult year fraught with fear, anxiety and personal and sociopolitical struggles, nothing has the power to soothe our collective souls – or coincides as perfectly with our renewed sense of hope – than a heartfelt, blissfully beautiful love...

News Co Media - avatar News Co Media

Metropolitan Business News

Essential Tips for Developing Corporate Websites

The corporate industry, just like the others, is experiencing a massive technological revolution. Organizations have changed their marketing criteria by embracing the internet. Therefore, do not be ...

News Co - avatar News Co

How to Make a Personal Injury Claim for Minors

As a parent, you want to make sure your child is always safe. But as much as you want to keep him under your watch, it is impossible to be there for him all the time. When he is out there attendin...

News Co - avatar News Co

Dress for Success - Style Essentials for Every Businessmen

Did you ever glance at a person in passing and instantly think, “Wow, they must be successful”? It seems like the rich and successful people always stand out from the crowd without even trying, ...

Diana Smith - avatar Diana Smith

Why use Google Adwords?

Google ads, previously known as Google AdWords is one of the best and most effective ways to advertise your business online. According to data released by Google, over 5.5 billion searches are made ...

News Co Media - avatar News Co Media

Perfecting Web Design For A Health-Based Website

These days, when it comes to understanding what we put into our bodies, we are more focused than ever. It seems that everywhere we look, there is another health benefit, product, or trend on the...

News Co Media - avatar News Co Media

3 Realistic Reasons Why Physical Offices Are (Almost) Dead

Nowadays, more and more businesses are trying to find alternatives to traditional offices. For many years, brick and mortar offices have been at the heart of a company’s life. But work environme...

News Co Media - avatar News Co Media

Writers Wanted

News Co Media

Content & Technology Connecting Global Audiences

More Information - Less Opinion