What role can BPS members play in addressing the current crisis in US support for science? Although this is only one of many current challenges, it is one that we are especially positioned to address. I suggest that we use this moment to embrace the idea that all scientists should be communicating the value and importance of science at every opportunity. Advocating for science to our elected representatives is one important part of this. However, it is likely even more important to inject the value of science into our everyday conversations with our families, neighbors, friends, communities, and chance acquaintances, in an effort to move ourselves into (or back to) an era in which the public is less intimidated by science and more excited about science as a source of advances that can improve the human condition.
Results from a recent international study give some insight into current attitudes (Cologna, V., et al. 2025. Trust in scientists and their role in society across 68 countries. Nat. Hum. Behav. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02090-5). Although the study reports a relatively positive view of science (“75% agree that scientific research methods are the best way to find out whether something is true or false”), they also report only a marginally positive view of scientists: only 57% think that most scientists are honest, only 56% think that most scientists are concerned about the well-being of others, and only 43% think that scientists listen to other viewpoints. Since 83% of respondents would like scientists to communicate more about science with the public, such communication presents a clear opportunity to improve public perception of scientists.
It is especially critical to inject the voices of scientists, and to have those voices be trusted, in a world in which the public is barraged with misinformation and disinformation that often come with life-threatening consequences. An important way to improve public perception of science and scientists is to intentionally seek more opportunities in our daily lives to talk with family, friends, and our communities about what we do. The stories we tell in these conversations can humanize scientists, illustrate how we conduct research, and convey the many ways in which basic science has and will continue to benefit humanity.
A key step in having positive conversations about science is to think about how we tell our stories. One challenge is that scientists are trained to avoid anecdotes and to instead talk about evidence, data, and statistics. As a scientist, I find it difficult to accept that facts and evidence are actually a poor means of persuasion when talking to a nonscientist. Instead, stories can be more engaging, memorable, and easier to comprehend. According to a review that advocates for using storytelling for communicating science to nonscientists, narratives may be “the default mode of human thought” (Dahlstrom, M. F. 2014. Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111:13614–13620). To be clear, we do tell stories, in every one of our scientific papers and talks. But we have much less practice at sharing stories with a nonscientific audience.
A second challenge is engaging with individuals who are firmly convinced of false information they have heard or read. Proceeding with empathy and curiosity are two approaches to help us keep our frustration at bay. We can engage with people to learn how they came to their conclusions, and we can consider the high emotional impact of the anecdotes they have heard or experienced. For instance, I can imagine that some parents of an autistic child might find it very difficult to proceed with recommended vaccinations of their second child, in spite of their doctor assuring them that there is no evidence of any link between vaccines and autism. To counterbalance the profound effects of such experiences and anecdotes, we can work on collecting powerful anecdotes that help to make the points that are supported by scientific evidence. Finally, since these conversations are likely to have mixed results, I wanted to share the perspective of a participant in the Biophysics Week storytelling workshop. She suggested that we think of each conversation as an experiment, an opportunity to learn what does and doesn’t work, and then use those insights to make the next conversation more effective.
Overall, it would be great if we turned the pain of this political moment into the energy to push for a cultural change within science. Let’s teach ourselves and our students the skills for good communication with nonscientists. We must prioritize these communications to be a a part of our job. Since taxpayers invest heavily in scientific research, let’s make the time to clearly articulate to the public the return on their investment. There are many recent positive moves in this direction. I have enjoyed attending sessions of a “Science Café”—short evening talks about science held at a local brewery, attracting a broad audience. It also has been wonderful to see our graduate students participating in (and winning!) three-minute thesis competitions. We should incorporate such opportunities into our curricula and reward such efforts in our evaluation processes. Changes in our individual attitudes and our requirement/reward structures will ultimately change the culture.
What is the role of BPS in speaking up for science? Our Public Affairs Committee (PAC) works to advocate for science funding and sound science policy. In addition, PAC disseminates information on its website and through emails to empower BPS members to reach out to elected officials individually when we are inspired to do so. In contrast, engaging with the general public is best done by individual members, through both formal efforts like talks for nonscientists, and through informal everyday conversations with our families and in our communities. Thank you to all of our members for the outreach that you already do. For support and inspiration of outreach, 1)BPS will continue to update this listing of resources for communication with nonscientists, and 2) BPS is planning to highlight outreach efforts of our members. Please send a link to your outreach work to [email protected] so we can post some examples.
My hope is that we will all be inspired by the current moment to each do a bit more. I welcome your suggestions in this important endeavor at [email protected].
—Lynmarie K. Thompson, President