At a recent Metcalf Institute luncheon, New York Times science journalist Cornelia Dean told Rhode Island researchers they must make clear statements about what their findings mean or risk failing to provoke greater public understanding and support.

Three decades ago, the National Academy of Sciences formally reported on climate change to President Jimmy Carter.

Nearly 20 years earlier, in February 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson noted in a special message to Congress, “This generation has altered the composition of the atmosphere on a global scale through . . . a steady increase in carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels.”

At an April 16 luncheon hosted by the Metcalf Institute for Marine & Environmental Reporting, renowned science journalist Cornelia Dean told the group of scientists gathered, “It’s kind of sad to look back and think about what kind of position we would be in (if we had acted) back in the Carter Administration.”

The hour-long noon event held at the University of Rhode Island’s Carothers Library was the second in a series of SciComm Exchanges arranged by the Metcalf Institute with support from Rhode Island NSF Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR).

Dean’s presentation focused on explaining scientific uncertainty, particularly in the context of climate change. The Metcalf SciComm events are being held across the state for natural and social science faculty, researchers and graduate students at Rhode Island colleges and universities in an effort to enhance best practices for science communication.

The first SciComm Exchange on Feb. 25, at Brown University, presented information on crafting a clear research message. The next session in July, specific details to be announced, will tackle science blogging.

Dean is a science writer for the New York Times, writing mostly about environmental issues and science policy. She has served as science editor of the Times, and was a fellow at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government and taught in the Harvard program on Environmental Science and Public Policy. She currently is a guest lecturer at Brown University’s Center for Environmental Studies.

“Too many people have not bought into the idea that human activity is threatening life as we know it on earth. There is a well-financed disinformation campaign.”

In introducing Dean, Metcalf Executive Director Sunshine Menezes, noted her accomplishments and said, “This woman knows what she’s talking about when it comes to communicating science to a broad audience.”

Dean graciously responded that she did not actually know anything herself, but rather she knew where to find the scientists to get the information she sought.

Lamenting the lack of action on the calamity of climate change, Dean said part of the problem stemmed from the scientific community’s emphasis on uncertainty rather than what was certain. She said, “Too many people have not bought into the idea that human activity is threatening life, as we know it on earth. There is a well-financed disinformation campaign.”

And, Dean added, “I blame the research community for this. Not totally, but they have contributed.”

Researchers typically do not say, here is a finding and this is what it means. Instead, Dean said, researchers will say, “Here is a finding and it opens the door to all kinds of new questions to ask.”

“You need to pay much more attention to stakeholders, how this issue is going to affect them. Pay more attention to what is important to your audience.”

She noted that National Academy of Sciences report conclusions almost always say the same thing — we need more money for research, not this issue needs to be addressed.

Dean said, “Scientists and engineers can’t get ahead of their data.”

Communication, she said, is only part of the answer. People respond to information to the degree that it aligns with what they already know. People also listen to those they consider opinion leaders. And, people want to hold positions that are congruent with the group they belong to or aspire to be in.

Dean said it was important to take these concepts into consideration when presenting information on climate change, noting, “You need to pay much more attention to stakeholders, how this issue is going to affect them. Pay more attention to what is important to your audience.”

Consequently, researchers must figure out what their audience already knows and believes, and address a broader range of people. Reaching out to colleagues in professional journals is not enough — make a clear statement “in a place where the rest of the world is going to see it,” said Dean.

She advocated a greater willingness to speak out and for institutions to reward researchers who engage with the public: “They pay it lip service, but far too often (speaking out) is not going to get you tenure, it’s not going to get you a grant, it’s not going to get you anything you care about. People respond to incentives. If you incentivize silence, which is kind of what you have, we shouldn’t be surprised when people don’t speak out.”

Clearly, not all scientists are going to be the charismatic Neal deGrasse Tyson, host of the recently re-launched Carl Sagan series, Cosmos, but working at and developing a skill set will increase confidence and ability, Dean noted. And, the looming climate threat demands greater involvement.

Dean said, “Basically, we are conducting an enormous experiment with the planet and we don’t have any other facilities.”

Story by Amy Dunkle / Courtesy photos, Metcalf Institute