How can you teach scientists to communicate uncertainty in their research?

first of all , you should teach the scientists in your team the basic and advanced knowledge for scientific research. Second, you should convey your results to the audience via reliable and suitable channels. For example, if you want to deliver the message that asthmatic patients should take the influenza vaccine in winter, you should choose a popular and brilliant physician who can convince people in simple words.

Uncertainty is usually described mathematically, and the outcome is most people are unable to associate meaning to it as the mathematical concepts are unknown to them. In fact, it has been shown that using words can help and since a CIA report in 1964 words of estimative probability have been shown to be useful. In our own work with Vizent glyphs, we have been looking to visually encode categorical uncertainty to give a quick way to gain an impression of uncertainty with promising initial results. Finally, we have looked to switch the discussion from the negatively framed concept of uncertainty to the positively framed level of agreement. There is evidence that the word uncertainty itself puts off readers from engaging in understanding.

I think this miscasts the issues. In general scientists tend to be cautious in interpreting results when discussing with each other. It is the press, politicians and public that want instant answers. So the communication by scientists needs to be absorbed over a longer timescale than one press release. Time to shift science journalism off the news desk and over to feature writers, who can take a longer term perspective.

Confronting uncertainty and helping your reader think about what it means is incredibly important to being an honest science communicator; but it is important also to be clear about what information the reader can be confident in. There's a big difference between results you're 60% certain about versus those you are 95% certain about, so don't treat them the same when talking to your audience. Remember that you are an expert, and your audience looks to you for guidance on what they can trust as much as what they cannot trust.

Exactly. Don’t be afraid to admit you don’t know the answer to a question. A real leveller which can initiate discussion, create an hypothesis and explore how you would go about investigating it. Scientific thinking in action and true public engagement.

Well, in my view, no one’s interested in 65% certain. Gosh the artificial unintelligence says I have to wrote more characters before anyone reads me. What happened to : I am sorry to write at length, I had not time to be briefer.

There is no shame in saying what you don't know. "We were working with X information, and so we came to conclusion Y," is perfectly alright, as long as you then follow up by saying "The questions we still have are a, b and c. Why? Because we need to determine f and g." This clarity and honesty will build trust in what you are saying.

One effective approach to teaching this skill is by incorporating storytelling techniques. Contextualize the Research, useing visuals and analogies. This approach helps engage the audience, provide context, and foster a better understanding of the complexities of scientific inquiry. Ultimately, it promotes transparency and ensures that scientific findings are accurately interpreted and applied.