Should You Be Doing Science or Sharing It?
Some scientists feel their biggest impact happens when they take their work beyond academia. Here are the key challenges they face and what happens when they successfully disrupt the system.
Many researchers are interested in sharing their passion outside of academic circles, but struggle to find the time, motivation and confidence. Even today, many researchers forego entering the world of public-facing science communication. With skyrocketing rates of misinformation and slow-to-change systems that don’t react quickly enough to the science, it’s never been more important to get reserachers into the social realm. But, it’s still not happening.
Between pressure to publish and doubting if scientists even should be sharing so much publicly, there are several issues getting in the way. In this edition of The Scoop, we’ll get an insider’s lens into exactly how researchers are overcoming these challenges and taking matters into their own hands when it comes to sharing their work. From our recent conversation with Jonathan Tonkin, head of the Tonkin Lab at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand, we examine how sharing research is just as important as contributing to it.
Join this upcoming research Webinar to learn new techniques and strategies for conducting literature review and finding research gaps.
Finding Research Gaps: A Step by Step Strategy
Sat, 22nd of June 2024
Sharing science: key issues
Sharing discoveries, educating the public and joining public debates with an expert angle are essential to ensure scientific contributions make a real-world impact. But most researchers today still don’t take on these roles.
There are several reasons why the scientific community is largely still reluctant. For one, there’s still some hesitation among the scientific community to be outwardly opinionated. For another, there’s no reward system in place to provide the time and resources for scientists to do so. Despite these challenges, a growing number of researchers are making their way into the public sphere in order to make an impact.
Barriers to engagement
Some argue that activism and political engagement isn’t recommended. The role of scientists is to provide objective information, from which other people (i.e. policy makers) make informed decisions. Thus, scientists shouldn’t engage directly in activism. Although this sounds good in theory, most researchers would agree that this system has been somewhat ineffective. Moreover, Tonkin argues, no scientist is purely objective. Scientists are inherently passionate about their research, so they can’t be genuinely disconnected from the outcome.
Even if this hurdle is surpassed, researchers interested in making a dent in the public sphere need to spend considerable effort to get their work beyond the walls of academia. Today, this looks like online promoting, active social media engagement, and public speaking. This time-consuming endeavor is also rarely motivated in academic systems, making it hard for most to find the time to even start.
Breaking through the noise
Despite these challenges, an increasing number of scientists are still doing it. For Tonkin, the answer came down to personal reasons. Tonkin’s lab focuses on understanding and predicting the dynamics of ecological systems, and using this information to effect change. His passion for the environment not only drives his scientific endeavors but also fuels him to try and bring his work into the public domain.
The Tonkin Lab contributes to our understanding around climate change, biodiversity, the mismanagement of water, etc., but the rate of change in response to academic work is universally slow. The problems continue to persist. Thus, Tonkin felt a sense of urgency to act, “to do something more now beyond just publishing papers”.
Fast forward to today, where he’s invested over 100 hours into his Substack, Predirections, focused on educating the layman on the “biodiversity-climate nexus”.
Surprising systematic benefits
Although we’re treating them as distinct, sharing and doing science are fundamentally inseparable. The way science has been done has so radically changed and accelerated that the very structures we use would be incomprehensible to researchers a century ago. In the past (think early 1900s and before), science was done largely by “invisible colleges”, at a time when much work and collaboration happened informally. Today, the research landscape is dominated by enormous and wealthy institutions, with the vast majority of work being communicated in dense manuscripts and materials. This little science versus big science distinction was identified as early as 1963, and has only become more obvious in recent decades with 2 million+ formal publications a year and an army of tools to help researchers decode this wealth of information (Litmaps!).
But, with scientists entering the world of social media, blogging and other modes of informal communication, we’re seeing this narrative shift. These alternative science communication modes not only impact the public, but even the academic systems themselves. Acts like sharing early science and new ideas via newsletters, conducting Open-notebook science, and even just tweeting at strangers online about your research, shifts the focus from polished articles back to the sphere of spontaneous and informal discourse.
How to get started
Most researchers face the same challenges: limited time and an endless pressure to publish, publish, publish.
Nonetheless, even in this environment, many scientists do make the time to get their messages “out there”. Given the hundreds of hours it takes to build and maintain a strong public-facing presence, it can’t be a process without great motivation and reward.
The two keys to Tonkin’s perseverance are simple: make a commitment, and make it easy to stick to by ensuring it’s beneficial.
Make a commitment
Like many scientists, Tonkin used to dabble on Twitter (ie. #AcademicTwitter), but found it difficult to break out to a broader audience.
About three months ago, he made the personal commitment to publish one article per week on his new Substack, Predirections, for a year. He has been steadfast in his publishing since then, with a new article out roughly every week.
With a hard commitment like this, Tonkin has been able to set himself a structure in which to create freely, which is long attributed as the one of the key measures of success in creative and scientific endeavors. “Freedom through structure,” as Timothy Slater puts it.
Make sharing work for you
Science communication sometimes is viewed with an “us” versus “them” mentality: whether it’s the scientists versus the public, or even a distinction among scientists who carry the title “science communicator” and those who don’t. These distinctions aren’t helpful, according to Tonkin.
“I don’t think of myself as being a science communicator at all. I just like to share interesting and important science.”
Tonkin doesn’t view his blog just as a platform by which to communicate with the public. He views it as a beneficial outlet for enhancing his own writing, messaging and ideas. It’s the same method by which other prominent writers and researchers swear by, like Michael Shermer on his Substack, After Babel. By finding the process of sharing beneficial for their own work, these researchers are getting the best of both worlds.
“It’s a good process of writing as well… It helps you to refine your message… By going through the process of sharing your research in a way that reaches a broader audience, it helps you understand deeply what your messages are.” - Tonkin
So what should you do, really?
With limited time and an endless pressure to publish, it can be difficult for scientists to make the leap or to the realm of science communication. As we see with Tonkin, it often boils down to a personal decision. Even with high motivation though, the journey isn’t easy. Tonkin himself admits to spending more time than he’d like on his new blog.
He tries to reduce the work-load by lowering his expectations of perfectionism and by recognizing that his public-facing work isn’t the same as peer-reviewed articles. He also continues to associate his blog posts with the research he’s interested in pursuing, to ensure he sustainably gets the best out of both worlds.
As is the case for most writers and creators, external reward can also fuel additional energy to pour into the passion. Receiving positive comments and engagement make Tonkin feel that people are genuinely enjoying his work, and that it’s making a difference. Of course, we all enjoy higher self-esteem from positive social feedback. But, it’s not this alone which keeps Tonkin attached to his work. At the core, purpose and values overcome threats to our self-esteem (say, for a poorly received blog post), and its this we can tap into when we struggle to keep going.
If we’ve got you convinced, then here are a few ideas to try:
Start a social media account (Twitter, TikTok, LinkedIn, Instagram, etc.)
Blog, newsletter, etc.
Open science notebook - conducting research “in public” so to speak. They not only increase public trust and understanding the scientific process, but help generate more reliable and vetted science. Being an early career researcher doesn’t exclude you either. You can check out platforms like OpenLabNotebooks, Open WetWare, Open Neuroscience, or even just your Jupyter Notebook.
So, can you really make an impact by sharing your work and research passions publicly? Or is the real question, can you really make an impact any other way?
We’re curious to hear your thoughts below, and what experiences you’ve had with sharing your research so far. With the core mission of Litmaps to accelerate impactful science, we are just as interested as how our tool supports scientific breakthroughs within academia and well beyond it.
The Scoop would like to thank Jonathan Tonkin for his insights and contributions to this edition of The Scoop. Learn more about his research lab and follow his Substack here.
Resources
On science and activism: can we be truly objective as scientists? May 2024
The importance of distinguishing climate science from climate activism May 2024
Social Media and the Production of Knowledge: A Return to Little Science? 2010
Very good article, calling for scientists to become stronger activists. As a student I am sometimes sickened by the amount of negative climate change literature coming out and reporting yet another doomsday scenario.
Scientists need to become more entrepreneurial, they are the only ones who understand the problem and yet the ones actually doing something are more idealistic activists or folks looking to make money.
Thank you for this article!