Unpopular opinion: I am a physicist, and I really don’t like the Big Bang Theory. I was first introduced to the show during its first season when my brother came home from college and excitedly told me about this hilarious new show that I would love. And he had good reason to think I’d like it: I love physics, and I love sitcoms. And I’ll admit that I watched several seasons, and I initially thought it was funny. But over the course of the next several years, I became increasingly annoyed by the fact that every time I told someone I was a physicist, they responded with something like “You don’t seem like a Sheldon.” And I do have to acknowledge first and foremost, that if nothing else, the show at least put physics on the radar for many members of the general public who may not have otherwise heard about it. But beyond that, the show has, in my experience, only furthered negative stereotypes about science and scientists. The show’s scientists (at least in the first seasons) are all extremely socially-awkward men. They are portrayed as inherently brilliant (as opposed to hardworking) and unrelatable to the average person.

I started thinking about this over the weekend after attending the Scientific Storytelling workshop and the informal Q&A afterward led by Joe Palca and Maddie Sofia of NPR. I entered the workshop expecting to learn tips for constructing well thought out, logically-sound arguments for why science matters. But all of my pretentious ideas about what science communication is were tossed out the window when Joe and Maddie began discussing the major aims and obstacles of science communication. The discussion began with a question about how science and scientists are perceived in our society today. Some pointed out that it seems like scientists are not given the credibility and respect that they once were. Science seems increasingly not to matter to politicians. Why is that? What can we do to change it? I think the problem comes down to one of relatability.

As Maddie bluntly pointed out, “The information deficit model is dead.” The Information Deficit Model is the idea that the disconnect between science and policy is due merely to a lack of information. If we could just lay out all the facts before Congress, then we could convince the president and everyone else that climate change is real. But as it turns out, more information doesn’t necessarily correlate with changed beliefs. More information does not lead to better scientific funding or policies based on science. The problem isn’t misinformation. The problem is that political beliefs and values have a lot more to do with public perception and voting trends than do facts. So what does that mean for us as scientists?

We all need to be science communicators. And we don’t just need lofty articles in Scientific American. And we don’t just need ground-breaking medical discoveries to be advertised. (Although of course, those things are important.) Maddie, Joe and other members of the Q&A came up with a lot of great suggestions for where we can go from here.

Some ways to be a relatable scientist:

• Start by talking to your friends and family. Identify common values and go from there.
• Learn to talk about your research without using jargon. If you can’t describe your research without using a lot of technical words, then you may not understand it as well as you think you do. It turns out that it’s really hard to explain your research well without using jargon! But it’s well worth the effort.
• Embrace your fallibility. Emphasize that science is a messy and cyclic process. We all make guesses, then experiment, then revise our guesses, then start all over again. Sometimes we are wrong. Sometimes we disagree. But if we are open and honest about this, then it lends a lot more credibility to the scientific process as a whole.
• Humanize scientists and support diversity in the sciences. This is where my beef with the Big Bang Theory comes in. Science is not only for people who are so smart that they can’t relate to the average person. You don’t have to be socially awkward to be a scientist. After all, as Maddie pointed out, “98% of scientists are human.”

If you are interested in hearing more stories that emphasize the scientific process, check out Joe’s Big Idea.

And grad students interested in learning more about science communication can check out Friends of Joe’s Big Idea.

--Jessie Barrick