Dr. Amy Greer. Photo credit: University of Guelph
Science communication involves educating and informing the public about scientific research and facts in a way that resonates with them. With growing public interest in promising cell and gene therapies, those working in the field can expect that mastering science communication will become increasingly important.
In the talk called “Science Communication During Crisis,” Amy Greer shared examples of science communication related to the COVID-19 virus and public health precautions that occurred in early 2020 at the onset of the pandemic, and how they measured up against core principles of good crisis science communication. The six principles that Dr. Greer explained are based on the work of Peter Sandman (2003). The talk took place on November 3 as part of the virtual 2020 Life Sciences Ontario (LSO) Policy Forum.
That said, you don’t need to be communicating about your science in a crisis scenario to find value in the principles that Dr. Greer outlined. As a communications professional, I can verify that these principles also hold water when communicating about emerging research, technologies and therapies in the regenerative medicine field, including cell and gene therapies.
Below, find the six principles of good crisis communications for infectious disease outbreaks, and tips for how to apply them as you craft science communication related to your work on regenerative medicine-based technologies, and cell and gene therapies.
Principle 1: Get the facts straight
Clear and simple messaging resonates best with the public. When developing messages, keep in mind that most people do not have your level of knowledge about the subject matter. Use straightforward statements of facts and explain their implications, worded in plain language.
Principle 2: Acknowledge uncertainty
Uncertainty exists in the cell and gene therapy field. Because treatments are new, we lack post market surveillance data to demonstrate efficacy and safety. This type of uncertainty will diminish with time. Until then, be clear and transparent in your messaging.
Principle 3: Treat emotions as legitimate
Are the results of your research disappointing, and therefore they might strike an emotional response for people who hoped for a cure or therapy? If so, acknowledge how audiences could feel when hearing about your work, and include proactive reassurance and empathy in your messages.
Principle 4: Establish your own humanity
People relate to people. Sharing personal details about yourself, which you’re comfortable disclosing publicly, can help audiences get to know the face behind the science and develop a bond. This will increase the likelihood of the public recalling or acting upon your messages.
Principle 5: Offer people things to do
What should audiences do after hearing about your work? Even a call-to-action like “talk to your doctor” or “visit my website” could help curious members of the public get more information.
Principle 6: Worry less about “panic” and more about “denial”
It’s possible that some audiences will react with panic upon learning of a scientific discovery or its use. The global reaction to Dr. He Jiankui, when he implanted gene-edited embryos into two women who gave birth to genetically altered girls, is a good example of this. This was a major news story around the world and the scientific community was up in arms about his unethical actions. The ISSCR released a statement and Dr. He was arrested for his actions.
Although panic is not an ideal reaction to a scientific finding, there could be more severe repercussions if members of the public deny the impacts of your work altogether. If you can think of any reasons the public would dismiss or avoid your science, try to address them in messages. For example, the controversy around stem cell research (particularly, embryonic stem cells) has been documented; therefore, if your work involves stem cells, you could use your messaging to proactively address common public concerns and/or areas where the public might not be well informed.
As Dr. Greer mentioned in her talk, the success of ongoing crisis science communications during the COVID-19 pandemic relies on communicators’ transparency, credibility and trust with the public. The six principles of good crisis communications for infectious disease outbreaks are used by public health authorities to build this crucial foundation.
As tools in your science communication toolbox, these principles can be used to help build your own transparency, credibility and trust too, thus increasing the likelihood that your messages will resonate with the public.
Which principle do you think you will incorporate into your science communication first? Share in the comments.
Laine Bodnar
Latest posts by Laine Bodnar (see all)
- Right Turn: Ethics in science communication - April 8, 2025
- Regulatory affairs careers: What scientists need to know - March 18, 2025
- How to kickstart scicomm careers beyond academia - October 31, 2024
Comments