How can we cultivate trust in science amidst a world that is becoming increasingly divided? A collective comprised of scientists, journalists, policymakers, and others convened at MIT on March 10 to explore ways to close the divide between scientific knowledge and public comprehension.
The symposium, dubbed “Cultivating Trust in Science for a Well-informed Tomorrow,” was hosted by the MIT Press and the nonprofit Aspen Institute’s Science and Society Program. It included discussions on the influence of storytelling, the part social media and generative artificial intelligence play in our information realm, and the reasons why certain scientific topics can trigger strong emotional reactions.
A recurring topic was the necessity of empathy between science communicators and the general public.
“The notion that differing opinions are often regarded as disrespectful is a profound observation,” stated MIT’s Ford Professor of Political Science Lily Tsai. “One effective way to express respect is through genuine curiosity coupled with an openness to reconsider one’s position. We frequently concentrate on facts and evidence, urging, ‘Don’t you comprehend the data?’ However, the ideal dialogue resembles, ‘You value ‘x.’ Explain to me why you value ‘x’ and let’s discover if there’s a way we can align on how science and research can aid you in achieving those values, even if I don’t concur with them.’”
Numerous attendees addressed the menace of misinformation, a challenge intensified by the rise of social media and generative AI. Nevertheless, there are also promising developments for the scientific community. MIT Provost Cindy Barnhart commenced the event by referencing surveys indicating a substantial level of trust in scientists globally. However, she also highlighted a U.S. survey revealing that communication was perceived as a relative weakness among scientists.
Barnhart emphasized MIT’s enduring dedication to science communication and praised the outreach initiatives connected with MIT, including MIT Press, MIT Technology Review, and MIT News.
“We are diligently working to convey the importance of science to society as we strive to garner public backing for the scientific research, discoveries, and evidence essential in our community,” Barnhart remarked. “At MIT, a vital approach we adopt is by illuminating the pioneering work of our faculty, researchers, scientists, staff, postdocs, and students.”
Another focus was the significance of storytelling within science communication, with participants, including the two principal speakers, sharing a wealth of their personal narratives. Francis Collins, who led the National Institutes of Health from 2009 to 2021, and Sudanese climate journalist Lina Yassin presented a joint keynote address moderated by MIT Vice President for Communications Alfred Ironside.
Reflecting on his tenure managing the NIH during the Covid-19 crisis, Collins noted that while the development of the Covid-19 vaccine was a significant achievement, the scientific community fell short in conveying to the public how science adapts in response to new evidence.
“We lost an opportunity to leverage the pandemic as a teaching moment,” Collins remarked. “In March of 2020, we were only beginning to understand the virus and its transmission, yet we had to offer guidance to the public, which frequently altered a month or two later. As a result, people began to question the reliability of the information they were receiving because it was continually changing. If you find yourself in a situation where you are relaying scientific evidence, begin by stating, ‘This is a work in progress.’”
Collins asserted that a more robust plan for public communication should have been in place when the pandemic began.
“Our healthcare system was gravely inadequate at that point due to prolonged underinvestment, so community-based education wasn’t truly feasible,” Collins indicated, acknowledging that his agency should have done more to empower trusted physicians in rural areas. “A disproportionate amount of our communication was top-down.”
In her keynote presentation, Yassin recounted her efforts to encourage individuals in her homeland to evacuate ahead of natural disasters. She noted that many initially disregarded her recommendations, citing their faith in God’s design for them. However, when she adjusted her messaging to integrate Islamic teachings, a religion predominantly practiced throughout the country, the response became significantly more favorable.
This highlighted another common insight shared by participants: Scientific discussions do not exist in a vacuum. Any dialogue that overlooks an individual’s existing values and experiences will be less impactful.
“Personal experiences, along with personal faith and belief, are critically significant filters that we encounter each time we engage with individuals about science,” Ironside stated.