Reflecting on Indonesia's young academy movement.

In the past three decades, there has been a rise in young academy movements in the Global North and South. Such movements, in at least Germany and the Netherlands, have been shown to be quite effective in connecting scientific work with society. Likewise, these movements share a common goal of developing interdisciplinary collaboration among young scientists, which contributes to the growth of a nation's-but also global-scientific endeavors. This paper focuses on the young academy movement in the fourth-largest country hosting the biggest Muslim population in the world, which is also the third-most populous democracy: Indonesia. We observe that there has been rising awareness among the young generation of scientists in Indonesia of the need to advocate for the use of sciences in responding to upcoming and current multidimensional crises. Science advocacy can be seen in their peer-based identification of Indonesia's future challenges, encompassing the fundamental areas for scientific inquiry, discovery, and intervention. We focus on the Indonesian Young Academy of Sciences (ALMI) and its network of young scientists. We describe ALMI's science communication practice, specifically SAINS45 and Science for Indonesia's Biodiversity, and how they have been useful for policymakers, media, and school engagements. The article closes with a reflection on future directions for the young academy movement in Indonesia and beyond.

An illusion of predictability in scientific results: Even experts confuse inferential uncertainty and outcome variability.

Traditionally, scientists have placed more emphasis on communicating inferential uncertainty (i.e., the precision of statistical estimates) compared to outcome variability (i.e., the predictability of individual outcomes). Here, we show that this can lead to sizable misperceptions about the implications of scientific results. Specifically, we present three preregistered, randomized experiments where participants saw the same scientific findings visualized as showing only inferential uncertainty, only outcome variability, or both and answered questions about the size and importance of findings they were shown. Our results, composed of responses from medical professionals, professional data scientists, and tenure-track faculty, show that the prevalent form of visualizing only inferential uncertainty can lead to significant overestimates of treatment effects, even among highly trained experts. In contrast, we find that depicting both inferential uncertainty and outcome variability leads to more accurate perceptions of results while appearing to leave other subjective impressions of the results unchanged, on average.

Understanding changes in genetic literacy over time and in genetic research participants.

As genomic and personalized medicine becomes mainstream, assessing and understanding the public's genetic literacy is paramount. Because genetic research drives innovation and involves much of the public, it is equally important to assess its impact on genetic literacy. We designed a survey to assess genetic literacy in three ways (familiarity, knowledge, and skills) and distributed it to two distinct samples: 2,050 members of the general population and 2,023 individuals currently enrolled in a large-scale genetic research study. We compared these data to a similar survey implemented in 2013. The results indicate that familiarity with basic genetic terms in 2021 (M = 5.36 [range 1-7], p < 0.001) and knowledge of genetic concepts in 2021 (M = 9.06 [56.6% correct], p = 0.002) are significantly higher compared to 2013 (familiarity: M = 5.08 [range 1-7]; knowledge: M = 8.72 [54.5% correct]). Those currently enrolled in a genetic study were also significantly more familiar with genetic terms (M = 5.79 [range 1-7], p < 0.001) and more knowledgeable of genetic concepts (M = 10.57 [66.1% correct], p < 0.001), and they scored higher in skills (M = 3.57 [59.5% correct], p < 0.001) than the general population (M = 5.36 [range 1-7]; M = 9.06 [56.6% correct]; M = 2.65 [44.2% correct]). The results suggest that genetic literacy is improving over time, with room for improvement. We conclude that educational interventions are needed to ensure familiarity with and comprehension of basic genetic concepts and suggest further exploration of the impact of genetic research participation on genetic literacy to determine mechanisms for potential interventions.

A community-driven approach to enhancing the quality and interpretability of microscopy images.

Scientific publications in the life sciences regularly include image data to display and communicate revelations about cellular structure and function. In 2016, a set of guiding principles known as the 'FAIR Data Principles' were put forward to ensure that research data are findable, accessible, interoperable and reproducible. However, challenges still persist regarding the quality, accessibility and interpretability of image data, and how to effectively communicate microscopy data in figures. This Perspective article details a community-driven initiative that aims to promote the accurate and understandable depiction of light microscopy data in publications. The initiative underscores the crucial role of global and diverse scientific communities in advancing the standards in the field of biological images. Additionally, the perspective delves into the historical context of scientific images, in the hope that this look into our past can help ongoing community efforts move forward.

Meet the Metaorganism: A web-based learning app for undergraduate and graduate biology students.

Meet the Metaorganism is a web-based learning app that combines three fundamental biological concepts (coevolution, community dynamics, and immune system) with latest scientific findings using the metaorganism as a central case study. In a transdisciplinary team of scientists, information designers, programmers, science communicators, and educators, we conceptualized and developed the app according to the latest didactic and scientific findings and aimed at setting new standards in visual design, digital knowledge transfer, and online education. A content management system allows continuous integration of new findings, which enables us to expand the app with the dynamics of the research field. Students can thus gain a close insight and connection to current research, and at the same time learn that knowledge is not static but grows dynamically. Especially in the realm of the easily accessible metaorganism research, visualization plays an essential role to keep complex processes understandable and memorable. Meet the Metaorganism is freely available online and can be accessed here: www.metaorganism.app.

Why are people antiscience, and what can we do about it?

From vaccination refusal to climate change denial, antiscience views are threatening humanity. When different individuals are provided with the same piece of scientific evidence, why do some accept whereas others dismiss it? Building on various emerging data and models that have explored the psychology of being antiscience, we specify four core bases of key principles driving antiscience attitudes. These principles are grounded in decades of research on attitudes, persuasion, social influence, social identity, and information processing. They apply across diverse domains of antiscience phenomena. Specifically, antiscience attitudes are more likely to emerge when a scientific message comes from sources perceived as lacking credibility; when the recipients embrace the social membership or identity of groups with antiscience attitudes; when the scientific message itself contradicts what recipients consider true, favorable, valuable, or moral; or when there is a mismatch between the delivery of the scientific message and the epistemic style of the recipient. Politics triggers or amplifies many principles across all four bases, making it a particularly potent force in antiscience attitudes. Guided by the key principles, we describe evidence-based counteractive strategies for increasing public acceptance of science.

It feels like lupus: accessible science for the low-vision community on immune system dysfunction in lupus.

Science communication is often confined to spoken, written or graphical form, neglecting the integration of other tools that would open inclusive scientific dialog to the low-vision community. To address this barrier, members from the Monash Rheumatology clinical and laboratory research groups formed a Lupus Sensory Science team to create a breakout room at the 2023 Monash Sensory Science Exhibit on Autoimmunity. Our goal was to develop multimodal displays and artworks to engage participants with blindness and low vision with the immunological underpinnings of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Here I describe how we created several stations using a combination of tactile posters and models to communicate disease manifestations and immune system dysregulation in SLE. I reflect on how participants keenly engaged with our artworks, asking thoughtful questions that stimulated interesting discussions about treatment options in SLE. In addition, I analyze how our exhibit could be improved to further increase accessibility for the low-vision community. Overall, we learned a lot about how to be inclusive in scientific communication methods and we will strive to continue to engage all members of our community in scientific discussion.

Art, science and inclusion: multisensory Sciart of immunology for blind, low-vision and diverse-needs audiences.

Art is a powerful tool for conveying scientific discovery. Despite the perceived gap between art and science, as highlighted by CP Snow and others, examples of art communicating science can be found in the ancient world, the Renaissance and contemporary data visualization, demonstrating an enduring and historic connection. However, much of science relies on visual elements, excluding those with blindness, low vision and diverse needs, resulting in their low representation in STEM discourse. This paper introduces a novel science and art collaboration in the form of an exhibition program exploring the concepts of Immunology and Biomedicine to blind and vision-impaired audiences, capitalizing on the lived experience of a legally blind artist. Employing multisensory design, art and co-creation methodologies, it transcends traditional vision-based science communication, showcasing the potential for multisensory art to bridge the gap at the intersection of science and inclusion.

Liposomal delivery of self-peptide and calcitriol as tolerogenic immunotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis: an exploration using sensory science.

Immunology research holds significant potential for enhanced inclusivity at the beginning of the science literacy journey, but persistent challenges stem from limited awareness that improvement is needed in this field. At the 2023 Monash Sensory Science Exhibition, we had the opportunity to present several tactile posters, using simple materials, for visually impaired participants to showcase our research on the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis as a result of immune tolerance breakdown and liposome-based tolerogenic immunotherapy. The posters stimulated lively discussions about autoimmune arthritic diseases and our research. With consideration of the diversity of the participants, the efforts of scientists in promoting science literacy for the community can promote a more inclusive environment and engage and inspire a broader audience.

Scientific telephone: The cautionary tale of the global coverage of lichens.

Scientific history has many examples of profound statements that are later found to be unsubstantiated. The consequences of such misinformation can be dire. In the present article, we present a case where an unevidenced estimate of global lichen coverage proliferated through both scientific literature and popular media. We traced this estimate to a non-peer-reviewed publication from 1987. We found 76 academic articles (collectively cited 4125 times) and 13 other academic documents citing the statistic, citation chains without source attribution, and instances where the number or context was changed. We also found the statistic 37 times in popular media, which is especially concerning, given that these media communicate science to the broader public. We demonstrate how an unevidenced statement can spread, change through time, and ultimately be repeated without demand for evidence. We hope this case unplugs the telephone and provides a cautionary tale for researchers to ensure critical evaluation of citation and communication practices.

HIV Denial in the COVID Era.

Though scientific consensus regarding HIV causation of AIDS was reached decades ago, denial of this conclusion remains. The popularity of such denial has waxed and waned over the years, ebbing as evidence supporting HIV causation mounted, building again as the internet facilitated connection between denial groups and the general public, and waning following media attention to the death of a prominent denier and her child and data showing the cost of human life in South Africa. Decades removed from these phenomena, HIV denial is experiencing another resurgence, coupled to mounting distrust of public health, pharmaceutical companies, and mainstream medicine. This paper examines the history and current state of HIV denial in the context of the COVID pandemic and its consequences. An understanding of the effect of this phenomenon and evidence-based ways to counter it are lacking. Community-based interventions and motivational interviewing may serve to contain such misinformation in high-risk communities.

Strategies for crowdsourcing hearing health information: a comparative study of educational programs and volunteer-based campaigns on Wikimedia.

BACKGROUND: Several health institutions developed strategies to improve health content on Wikimedia platforms given their unparalleled reach. The objective of this study was to compare an online volunteer-based Wikimedia outreach campaign with university course Wikipedia assignments (both focused on improving hearing health content in Wikimedia's public digital knowledge archives), in terms of the reach of the contributions and the extent of the participants' input. A secondary objective was to examine the feasibility and the implementation of the different strategies. METHODS: The research team partnered for the (1) coordination of improvements in hearing and healthcare content through educational programs using Wikimedia platforms, (2) participation in the global campaign Wiki4WorldHearingDay2023 and (3) evaluation of the proposed strategies. Metrics used in the comparison of the two strategies included the number of articles edited, number of views of the edited articles (as reach) and the extent of edits, captured as the number of words. The feasibility evaluation included assessing recruitment success and the implementation of the proposed plan among faculty, students from various university programs, and volunteers representing different constituencies. RESULTS: The effort increased the availability of quality plain language information on hearing conditions and hearing care. Both strategies demonstrated to be feasible by their success in recruiting participants who contributed to the effort and by measurable outputs as edits. The contribution of content to Wikimedia platforms as part of education activities provided a more robust result. Wiki4WorldHearingDay2023 145 participants (78 from educational programs) contributed 167,000 words, 258 + references and 140 images to 322 Wikipedia articles (283 existing and 39 new ones), which were viewed 16.5 million times. Contributions occurred in six languages. Edits in Portuguese, mainly by those involved in educational programs, led the number of articles (226 or 70.2%) that were expanded or created during the 5-month tracking period. CONCLUSIONS: The elements that contributed to the success of the studied strategies include an impact topic, coordination with educational programs, international multidisciplinary collaborations, the dissemination of the initiative in several platforms, connection with a robust local Wikimedia affiliate, and the use of a technical infrastructure that provides metrics and coordination mechanisms.

The ethics of expert communication.

Despite its public visibility and impact on policy, the activity of expert communication rarely receives more than a passing mention in codes of scientific integrity. This paper makes the case for an ethics of expert communication, introducing a framework where expert communication is represented as an intrinsically ethical activity of a deliberative agent. Ethical expert communication cannot be ensured by complying with various requirements, such as restricting communications to one's area of expertise or disclosing conflicts of interest. Expert communication involves morally laden trade-offs that must be weighed by a deliberative agent. A basic normative framework is introduced, and concrete provisions are proposed for codes of scientific integrity.

Emotion and humor as misinformation antidotes.

Many visible public debates over scientific issues are clouded in accusations of falsehood, which place increasing demands on citizens to distinguish fact from fiction. Yet, constraints on our ability to detect misinformation coupled with our inadvertent motivations to believe false science result in a high likelihood that we will form misperceptions. As science falsehoods are often presented with emotional appeals, we focus our perspective on the roles of emotion and humor in the formation of science attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors. Recent research sheds light on how funny science and emotions can help explain and potentially overcome our inability or lack of motivation to recognize and challenge misinformation. We identify some lessons learned from these related and growing areas of research and conclude with a brief discussion of the ethical considerations of using persuasive strategies, calling for more dialogue among members of the science communication community.

No evidence for systematic voter fraud: A guide to statistical claims about the 2020 election.

After the 2020 US presidential election Donald Trump refused to concede, alleging widespread and unparalleled voter fraud. Trump's supporters deployed several statistical arguments in an attempt to cast doubt on the result. Reviewing the most prominent of these statistical claims, we conclude that none of them is even remotely convincing. The common logic behind these claims is that, if the election were fairly conducted, some feature of the observed 2020 election result would be unlikely or impossible. In each case, we find that the purportedly anomalous fact is either not a fact or not anomalous.

(Mis)informed about what? What it means to be a science-literate citizen in a digital world.

Science literacy is often held up as crucial for avoiding science-related misinformation and enabling more informed individual and collective decision-making. But research has not yet examined whether science literacy actually enables this, nor what skills it would need to encompass to do so. In this report, we address three questions to outline what it should mean to be science literate in today's world: 1) How should we conceptualize science literacy? 2) How can we achieve this science literacy? and 3) What can we expect science literacy's most important outcomes to be? If science literacy is to truly enable people to become and stay informed (and avoid being misinformed) on complex science issues, it requires skills that span the "lifecycle" of science information. This includes how the scientific community produces science information, how media repackage and share the information, and how individuals encounter and form opinions on this information. Science literacy, then, is best conceptualized as encompassing three dimensions of literacy spanning the lifecycle: Civic science literacy, digital media science literacy, and cognitive science literacy. Achieving such science literacy, particularly for adults, poses many challenges and will likely require a structural perspective. Digital divides, in particular, are a major structural barrier, and community literacy and building science literacy into media and science communication are promising opportunities. We end with a discussion of what some of the beneficial outcomes could be-and, as importantly, will likely not be-of science literacy that furthers informed and critical engagement with science in democratic society.

Misinformation in and about science.

Humans learn about the world by collectively acquiring information, filtering it, and sharing what we know. Misinformation undermines this process. The repercussions are extensive. Without reliable and accurate sources of information, we cannot hope to halt climate change, make reasoned democratic decisions, or control a global pandemic. Most analyses of misinformation focus on popular and social media, but the scientific enterprise faces a parallel set of problems-from hype and hyperbole to publication bias and citation misdirection, predatory publishing, and filter bubbles. In this perspective, we highlight these parallels and discuss future research directions and interventions.

What we know about effective public engagement on CRISPR and beyond.

Advances in gene editing technologies for human, plant, and animal applications have led to calls from bench and social scientists, as well as a wide variety of societal stakeholders, for broad public engagement in the decision-making about these new technologies. Unfortunately, there is limited understanding among the groups calling for public engagement on CRISPR and other emerging technologies about 1) the goals of this engagement, 2) the modes of engagement and what we know from systematic social scientific evaluations about their effectiveness, and 3) how to connect the products of these engagement exercises to societal decision or policy making. Addressing all three areas, we systematize common goals, principles, and modalities of public engagement. We evaluate empirically the likely successes of various modalities. Finally, we outline three pathways forward that deserve close attention from the scientific community as we navigate the world of Life 2.0.

A scientific theory of gist communication and misinformation resistance, with implications for health, education, and policy.

A framework is presented for understanding how misinformation shapes decision-making, which has cognitive representations of gist at its core. I discuss how the framework goes beyond prior work, and how it can be implemented so that valid scientific messages are more likely to be effective, remembered, and shared through social media, while misinformation is resisted. The distinction between mental representations of the rote facts of a message-its verbatim representation-and its gist explains several paradoxes, including the frequent disconnect between knowing facts and, yet, making decisions that seem contrary to those facts. Decision makers can falsely remember the gist as seen or heard even when they remember verbatim facts. Indeed, misinformation can be more compelling than information when it provides an interpretation of reality that makes better sense than the facts. Consequently, for many issues, scientific information and misinformation are in a battle for the gist. A fuzzy-processing preference for simple gist explains expectations for antibiotics, the spread of misinformation about vaccination, and responses to messages about global warming, nuclear proliferation, and natural disasters. The gist, which reflects knowledge and experience, induces emotions and brings to mind social values. However, changing mental representations is not sufficient by itself; gist representations must be connected to values. The policy choice is not simply between constraining behavior or persuasion-there is another option. Science communication needs to shift from an emphasis on disseminating rote facts to achieving insight, retaining its integrity but without shying away from emotions and values.

Students' approaches to developing scientific communication skills.

Science communication is a core skill for undergraduate science students to acquire in preparation for their future careers, but studies show that this skill is underdeveloped in science graduates. The aim of this study was to discover the resources and approaches undergraduate students use to effectively develop their science communication skills and how the use of these methods relates to academic performance on a communication task. Undergraduate students undertaking a second-year biomedical science course (n = 490) were asked which approaches and resources they used to aid the development of their science communication skills, and the frequency of their responses was correlated against their laboratory report mark, using multiple regression and relative weights analysis. Students' (n = 453) use of Communication Learning in Practice for Scientists (CLIPS; an open-access interactive website on science communication), resources provided by the university, interactions with university teaching staff, and engagement with the scientific literature significantly predicted the laboratory report mark. Students enrolled in a blended format or in remote online learning only, and in different programs, performed comparably in the written report and used similar approaches and resources, other than remote students reporting more use of other online resources and students in blended learning engaging more with university resources. Together, these findings provide insight into which strategies are most helpful for undergraduate students to engage with to improve their scientific communication skills. The findings highlight that the provision of well-designed interactive communication resources, guided assessment resources, and opportunities to engage with teaching staff can assist in the development of science communication skills.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study identifies the approaches and resources that undergraduate science students use to develop their science communication skills. It reveals which of these approaches and resources predict improved academic performance in a written science communication assessment task. The findings point to the importance of explicit guidance, and engagement with teaching staff, in advancing the development of science communication skills.