Wednesday, March 19, 2014

How to make yourself understood across field boundaries

It seems like everyone these days is excited about "interdisciplinary science", which is much like regular science but with a longer list of affiliations. Working together means talking together, which includes making presentations that appeal to people in different fields. Is there anything to keep in mind beyond generic advice about giving a talk (develop an outline, make eye contact, don't mumble, etc)?

Here are two pitfalls that I've noticed when people speak for "interdisciplinary" groups:
  • Tunnel vision. A speaker ignores the diverse backgrounds of audience members and assumes they all share his or her knowledge and interests. As a result, the speaker doesn't provide enough basic information for audience members to understand the talk, or to appreciate why the talk matters. 
  • Self-effacement. A speaker goes too far in catering to an audience and loses their own point of view as a result. I once heard a talk from a bioinformatics researcher. They seemed to think their audience contained only chemists and, furthermore, that no one would want to learn anything about biology. As a result, the speaker tried to avoid touching any biological details. The result? A deluge of vagueness and abstraction. 
What can we do to avoid these extremes so that speakers and audiences can meet in the middle? 
  1. Scope out the audience beforehand. Learn about your potential listeners. Think about what they're likely to know or not know, what they might feel strongly about, and why your talk is relevant to them. They might have more in common with you than you think. People are usually eager to latch onto something that connects to their interests, even tangentially. It's usually a good thing, but beware... 
  2. Stay in the driver's seat.  A handful of times, "I know about what the speaker is talking about" can devolve into "I need to prove that I know more about it than she does, especially since I consider myself more of a specialist".  As a speaker, it's your job to address questions/comments thoughtfully. However, if someone tries to derail you - and you'll know it when you see it! - it's also your job to stay on track and remind them that you're the one giving a talk, which is different from a one-on-one meeting. 
  3. Make good use of pictures and examples, which can help make ideas more concrete. A well-made diagram will make descriptions/equations/algorithms more approachable, especially to someone new to the subject. 
  4. Appeal to shared problem-solving tendencies. If you're talking to scientists - or to humans, generally* - it's likely that even if you have different backgrounds, you share an instinct for solving problems. Try to give your audience the basic information needed to answer a question. Then give them a chance to work out an answer before showing them your results. No need to demand a verbal response (which can get awkward), but you want their brains to work while they listen. It'll keep their attention and make your research process more relatable. 
  5. *If you're talking to non-humans, I would love to hear about that.
  6. Have some faith in your listeners. I've come across many blanket statements, like that biologists always quail at the sight of equations, or that one must never utter gene names in the presence of a physicist. Although these statements may allude to general preferences, we need to remember that people aren't defined by what subject their degree is in and, related to point #4, people like to learn. Try to gently and non-patronizingly lead people out from their comfort zone. If you can show them that something they thought was incomprehensible is actually not so bad, you'll help them feel smarter rather than dumber, which is a big step towards bringing together people with diverse backgrounds. 
What are your thoughts? Have you had any interesting experiences when presenting your work to others?  

5 comments :

  1. I think Niels Bohr was famous for mumbling, so I'm not sure about that generic advice.
    I like Point #4.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure that makes a difference. Being an accomplished scientist and a competent communicator are two different things, and one doesn't make up for the other.

      Delete
    2. Niels Bohr was also afraid of writing. Apparently even as a young adult he would dictate to his mother what to write for his work.

      This sounds like pretty useful advice. My old supervisor once suggested to write a talk in thirds. Make the first third so that everybody can understand. Make the middle third such that 2/3 can understand and then make the last third so that only 1/3 (the specialists) can understand.

      That way everybody hopefully gets something from it

      Delete
    3. I should add that my old supervisor is one of the best speakers/lectures I have ever heard

      Delete
    4. An interesting point of view. I suppose the first 1/3 is when people are trying the hardest to follow along anyway - in part to decide whether they should make the effort to follow the rest of the talk.

      Delete