How do we foster trust in science in an increasingly polarized world? A group including scientists, journalists, policymakers and more gathered at MIT on March 10 to discuss how to bridge the gap between scientific expertise and understanding.
The conference, titled “Building Trust in Science for a More Informed Future,” was organized by the MIT Press and the nonprofit Aspen Institute’s Science and Society Program. It featured talks about the power of storytelling, the role of social media and generative artificial intelligence in our information landscape, and why discussions about certain science topics can become so emotionally heated.
A common theme was the importance of empathy between science communicators and the public.
“The idea that disagreement is often seen as disrespect is insightful,” said MIT’s Ford Professor of Political Science Lily Tsai. “One way to communicate respect is genuine curiosity along with the willingness to change one’s mind. We’re often focused on the facts and evidence and saying, ‘Don’t you understand the facts?’ But the ideal conversation is more like, ‘You value ‘x.’ Tell me why you value ‘x’ and let’s see if we can connect on how the science and research helps you to fulfill those values, even if I don’t agree with them.’”
Many participants discussed the threat of misinformation, a problem exacerbated by the emergence of social media and generative AI. But it’s not all bad news for the scientific community. MIT Provost Cindy Barnhart opened the event by citing surveys showing a high level of trust broadly in scientists across the globe. Still, she also pointed to a U.S. survey showing communication was seen as an area of relative weakness for scientists.
Barnhart noted MIT’s long commitment to science communication and commended communication efforts affiliated with MIT including MIT Press, MIT Technology Review, and MIT News.
“We’re working hard to communicate the value of science to society as we fight to build public support for the scientific research, discovery, and evidence that is needed in our society,” Barnhart said. “At MIT, an essential way we do that is by shining a bright light on the groundbreaking work of our faculty, research, scientists, staff, postdocs, and students.”
Another theme was the importance of storytelling in science communication, and participants including the two keynote speakers offered plenty of their own stories. Francis Collins, who directed the National Institutes of Health between 2009 and 2021, and Sudanese climate journalist Lina Yassin delivered a joint keynote address moderated by MIT Vice President for Communications Alfred Ironside.
Recalling his time leading the NIH through the Covid-19 pandemic, Collins said the Covid-19 vaccine development was a major success, but the scientific community failed to explain to the public the way science evolves based on new evidence.
“We missed a chance to use the pandemic as a teachable moment,” Collins said. “In March of 2020, we were just starting to learn about the virus and how it spread, but we had to make recommendations to the public, which would often change a month or two later. So people began to doubt the information they were getting was reliable because it kept changing. If you’re in a circumstance where you’re communicating scientific evidence, start by saying, ‘This is a work in progress.’”
Collins said the government should have had a better plan for communicating information to the public when the pandemic started.
“Our health system was badly broken at the time because it had been underinvested in for far too long, so community-based education wasn’t really possible,” Collins said, noting his agency should have done more to empower physicians who were trusted voices in rural communities. “Far too much of our communication was top down.”
In her keynote address, Yassin shared her experience trying to get people in her home country to evacuate ahead of natural disasters. She said many people initially ignored her advice, citing their faith in God’s plan for them. But when she reframed her messaging to incorporate the teachings of Islam, a religion most of the country practices, she said people were much more receptive.
That was another recurring lesson participants shared: Science discussions don’t occur in a vacuum. Any conversation that ignores a person’s existing values and experiences will be less effective.
“Personal experience, as well as personal faith and belief, are critically important filters that we encounter every time we talk to people about science,” Ironside said.
