Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Lost in translation: neuroscience and the public

Nature Reviews Neuroscience volume 12, page 118 (2011)Cite this article

Subjects

The Nature Reviews Neuroscience Science and Society article by Illes et al. (Neurotalk: improving the communication of neuroscience research, Nature Reviews Neuroscience 11, 61–69 (2010))1 highlights the need for improved dialogue between neuroscientists and public, and suggests that empirical research on neuroscience communication is an essential start. Keehner and Fischer (Naive realism in public perceptions of neuroimages, Nature Reviews Neuroscience 12 Jan 2011(doi:10.1038/nrn2773-c1))2 respond to this call with an analysis of the 'dazzle effect' of neuroimages. Like Racine et al.3, they find that neurorealism plays a part in the credibility and seductive nature of brain images. Keehner and Fischer stress the importance of choosing visualization techniques with care, keeping in mind the impact that resulting images have on public perception. Communicating results meaningfully is a key goal for the neuroscience community.

To understand the scope of the challenge, we conducted a pilot study of the experience of neuroscientists in communicating their results. We surveyed a convenience sample of 600 neuroscientists whose work spans the whole academic and scientific range of the professional community. Of the 73 completed responses, 24 were from students (33%), 12 from postdoctoral fellows (16%), 28 from faculty (38%) and 9 from technologists and other staff (12%). Of the entire responder cohort, 19% reported that advances in brain research are well (16%) or very well (3%) communicated to the public. By contrast, 34% of responders reported that advances in brain research are poorly (29%) or very poorly (5%) communicated. A majority of responders (65%) reported that they interact with journalists to communicate information about their research less than once per year. Nearly half (44%) answered that their efforts to communicate about their research to the public are not valued by their institution.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Illes, J. et al. Neurotalk: improving the communication of neuroscience research. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 11, 61–69 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Keehner, M. & Fischer, M. H. Naive realism in public perceptions of neuroimages. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 12 Jan 2011 (doi:10.1038/nrn2773-c1).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Racine, E., Bar-Ilan, O. & Illes, J. fMRI in the public eye. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 6, 159–164 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Racine, E., Waldman, S., Rosenberg, J. & Illes, J. Contemporary neuroscience in the media. Soc. Sci. Med. 71, 725–733 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Morein-Zamir, S. & Sahakian, B. J. Neuroethics and public engagement training needed for neuroscientists. Trends Cogn. Sci. 14, 49–51 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Friedman, D. P. Public outreach: a scientific imperative. J. Neurosci. 28, 11743–11745 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bubela, T. et al. Science communication reconsidered. Nature Biotechnol. 27, 514–518 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Judy Illes and Julie M. Robillard are at the National Core for Neuroethics, the University of British Columbia, 2211 Wesbrook Mall, Koerner S124, Vancouver, BC V6T 2B5, Canada.,

    Julie M. Robillard & Judy Illes

Authors
  1. Julie M. Robillard
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Judy Illes
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Judy Illes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Robillard, J., Illes, J. Lost in translation: neuroscience and the public. Nat Rev Neurosci 12, 118 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2773-c2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2773-c2

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing