Relevant Research & Resources

The Alda Method - Built on Research and Experience  

The Alda Method was originally designed based on experience - experience Alan Alda had as an actor. When Alda hosted Scientific American Frontiers (1993 - 2005), he sensed that improvisational theater experiences could help scientists and health professionals become better communicators.

Since the Center’s founding in 2009, we have built on the original idea of using improv to improve science communication. As a team of social scientists and improv specialists, we collaborate to bring science and creativity to our work. 

Below are some of the sources we draw on in building various of our professional development programs. This is a growing list, as we’re constantly building new programs and refining legacy ones, and we incorporate current social science into everything we do. We also conduct our own research with the goal of using our discoveries to improve the science of science communication and make a difference in the world.

Science Communication

The Alda Method combines applied improvisational exercises and communication strategies to help people build interpersonal connections and trust across backgrounds, experiences, and expertise. This requires an ability to connect and engage, grounded in the processes of paying attention and engaging intellectually, emotionally, and/or physically with a set of ideas, practices, people, and/or questions (Fredricks et al., 2016; Linnenbrink-Garcia et al., 2011). 

Communication is not a thing we convey (i.e. information to be transmitted), but rather a process that forms our experiences of and relationships with each other and the material world in which we live (Craig, 1999). Following this line of thought, scientists do much more than transmit information, and our method aims to foster greater collaboration, empathy, and understanding between communication partners. Preparing scientists for this work involves creating opportunities for them to learn about, test, and refine these ideas, dispositions, and skills through performance and feedback cycles conducted in safe spaces (AAAS, 2020; Aurbach et al., 2019). 

AAAS. (2020). The public face of science in America: Priorities for the future. 

Akin, H. & Scheufele, D.A. (2017) Overview of the Science of Science Communication. In: The Oxford Handbook of The Science of Science Communication. Oxford University Press, 25-33.

Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary Crossing and Boundary Objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132-169. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311404435 

Aurbach, E. L., Prater, K. E., Cloyd, E. T., & Lindenfeld, L. (2019). Foundational skills for science communication: A preliminary framework [White Paper]. http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/150489

Baram-Tsabari, A., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2017). Science communication training: What are we trying to teach? International Journal of Science Education, 7(3), 285-300. doi: 10.1080/21548455.2017.1303756

Bednarek, A. T., Wyborn, C., Cvitanovic, C., Meyer, R., Colvin, R. M., Addison, P. F. E., Close, S. L., Curran, K., Farooque, M., Goldman, E., Hart, D., Mannix, H., McGreavy, B., Parris, A., Posner, S., Robinson, C., Ryan, M., & Leith, P. (2018, March 27). Boundary spanning at the science–policy interface: the practitioners’ perspectives [journal article]. Sustainability Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0550-9 

Berkes, F. (2009, 2009/04/01/). Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(5), 1692-1702. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.001 

Besley, J., Dudo, A., & Storksdieck, M. (2015). Scientists' views about communication training. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52, 199-220.

Besley, J., Dudo, A., Yuan, S., & Ghannam, N. A. (2016). Qualitative interviews with science communication trainers about communication objectives and goals. Science Communication, 38, 356-381. 

Besley, J., & Tanner, A. (2011). What science communication scholars think about training scientists to communicate. Science Communication, 33, 239-263. 

Brownell, S. E., Price, J. V., & Steinman, L. (2013). Science communication to the general public: Why we need to teach undergraduate and graduate students this skill as part of their formal scientific training. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 12, 6-10. 

Cash, D. W., Borck, J. C., & Patt, A. G. (2006). Countering the Loading-Dock Approach to Linking Science and Decision Making: Comparative Analysis of El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Forecasting Systems. Science, Technology & Human Values, 31(4), 465-494. http://www.library.umaine.edu/auth/EZProxy/test/authej.asp?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=21557284&site=ehost-live 

Copple, J., Bennett, N., Dudo, A., Moon, W. K., Newman, T. P., Besley, J., Leavey, N., Lindenfeld, L., & Volpe, C. (2020). Contribution of Training to Scientists’ Public Engagement Intentions: A Test of Indirect Relationships Using Parallel Multiple Mediation. Science Communication,https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547020943594

Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication Theory as a Field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119-161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00355.x 

Crona, B. I., & Parker, J. N. (2011). Network Determinants of Knowledge Utilization: Preliminary Lessons From a Boundary Organization. Science Communication, 33(4), 448-471. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547011408116 

Dahlstrom, Michael. 2014. Using Narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.  Vol.111, Supplement 4: The Science of Science Communication ii (September 16, 2014). pp..13614-13620.

Davies, S. R. (2008). Constructing communication: Talking to scientists about talking to the public. Science Communication, 29, 413–434. doi: 10.1177/1075547009316222 

Dudo, A., & Besley, J. C. (2016). Scientists’ prioritization of communication objectives for public engagement. PLoS ONE, 11, 1–18.

Fredricks, J. A., Filsecker, M., & Lawson, M. A. (2016, 2016/06/01/). Student engagement, context, and adjustment: Addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues. Learning and Instruction, 43, 1-4. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.02.002 

Gorghiu, G., & Santi, E. (2016). Applications of experiential learning in science education non-formal contexts. The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences, 320-326. doi: 10.15405/epsbs.2016.11.33.

Jackson, C. (2018). The public mostly trusts science. So why are scientists worried? Science. doi: 10.1126/science.aat3580

Kahan, D. (2010). Fixing the communications failure. Nature, 463(7279), 296-297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/463296a 

Kahan, D., Peters, E., Wittlin, M. et al. The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Clim Change 2, 732–735 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1547

Kuchel, L. (2019). Insights for designing science communication training from formal science education: Apply the mantra and be explicit. In T. Newman (Ed.), Theory and best practices in science communication training. Routledge. 

Layton, D., Jenkins, E., McGill, S., & Davey, A. (1993). Inarticulate science? Perspectives on the public understanding of science and some implications for science education. East Yorkshire: Studies in Education.

Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Rogat, T. K., & Koskey, K. L. K. (2011, 2011/01/01/). Affect and engagement during small group instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 13-24. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.09.001 

MacArthur, B.; Lindenfeld, L., Aurbach, E.; Bevan, B. & Newman, T.P. (2020). Bridging Science with Society: Defining Pathways for Engagement. Communication Center Journal,vol 6, No 1. 

MacArthur, B. L., Leavey, N. J., & Ng, A. E. (2019). Abandoning the runaway train: Slowing down to draw on lessons learned from health communication training. In T. Newman (Ed.), Theory and best practices in science communication training. Routledge. 

McGreavy, B., Hutchins, K., Smith, H., Lindenfeld, L., & Silka, L. (2013). Addressing the Complexities of Boundary Work in Sustainability Science through Communication. Sustainability, 5(10), 4195. http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/5/10/4195 

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/23674.

Parker, J. N., & Crona, B. I. (2012). On being all things to all people: Boundary organizations and the contemporary research university. Social Studies of Science, 42(2), 262-289. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312711435833 

Pew Research Center. (2019). Trust and Mistrust in Americans’ Views of Scientific Experts. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2019/08/02/trust-and-mistrust-in-americans-views-of-scientific-experts/ 

Rajput, A. S. D. (2017). Science communication as an academic discipline: An Indian perspective. Current Science, 113, 2262–2267. 

Rogers, C.L. (2000). Making the audience a key participant in the science communication process. Science and Engineering Ethics, 6, 553 – 557.

Smith, B. (2019). A Metro for science communication: Building effective infrastructure to support scientists’ communication and public engagement. In T. Newman (Ed.), Theory and best practices in science communication training. Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781351069366-11/metro-science-communication-brooke-smith 

Smith, H., Suldovsky, B., & Lindenfeld, L. (2016, 2016/01/02). Science and policy: scientific expertise and individual participation in boundary management. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 44(1), 78-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2015.1116707 

Storksdieck, M., Stein, J. K., and Dancu, T. (2006). Summative evaluation of public engagement in current health science at the current science and technology center, Museum of Science, Boston. Annapolis, MD: Institute for Learning Innovation. Retrieved from: https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/report_224.PDF 

Sturgin, P., & Allum, N. (2004). Science in society: Re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understanding of Science, 13, 55-74. 

Sturgis, P., & Allum, N. (2004). Science in society: re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understanding of Science, 13(1), 55-74. 

Suldovsky, B., McGreavy, B., and Lindenfeld, L.(2018) Evaluating Epistemic Commitments and Science Communication Practice in Transdisciplinary Research. Science Communication.https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547018786566 

Trench, B., & Miller, S. (2012). Policies and practices in supporting scientists' public communication through training. Science and Public Policy, 39, 722-731. 

Ziman, J. (1991). Public understanding of science. Science, Technology and Human Values

Alda Healthcare Experience

Healthcare professionals are under tremendous pressure to provide high quality healthcare at a fast pace, provide and process digital information, and communicate empathically with multiple stakeholders. The Alda Healthcare Experience was created to cultivate the vital role that communication plays in high functioning medical teams.

Literature shows there is a rising incidence of stress and burnout among physicians, nurses, and other healthcare professionals that is partially attributable to poor interprofessional communication. Interprofessional communication includes communication between different medical teams (e.g., surgeon-anesthesiologist, emergency department physician-cardiologist), different types of healthcare professionals (e.g., nurse-physician, physician-resident), and between healthcare professionals within the same discipline. Suboptimal interprofessional communication among healthcare workers results in decreased well-being, and also has major adverse impacts on organizational culture and patient safety. Effective team communication among healthcare workers is critical to ensure a thriving, resilient workforce and support equitable, culturally-competent, and effective healthcare delivery.

Copple, J., Bennett, N., Dudo, A., Moon, W. K., Newman, T. P., Besley, J., ... & Volpe, C. (2020). Contribution of training to scientists’ public engagement intentions: A test of indirect relationships using parallel multiple mediation. Science Communication, 42(4), 508-537.

 Dillard, J. P., Li, R., & Yang, C. (2021). Fear of Zika: Information seeking as cause and consequence. Health Communication, 36(13), 1785-1795.

Fessell D, McKean E, Wagenschutz H, Cole M, Santen SA, Cermak R, Zurales K, Kukora S, Lantz-Gefroh V, Kaplan-Liss E, Alda A. Medical Improvisation Training for all Medical Students: 3-Year Experience. Med Sci Educ. 2019 Dec 9;30(1):87-90. doi: 10.1007/s40670-019-00885-0. PMID: 34457643; PMCID: PMC8368574. 

Hathaway JR, Tarini BA, Banerjee S, Smolkin CO, Koos JA, & Pati S. (2022). Healthcare team communication training in the United States: A scoping review (2022). Health Communication. 2022 Feb 15:1-26. Doi: 10.1080/10410236.2022.2036439. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35168467.

Li, R., & Sundar, S. S. (2021). Can interactive media attenuate psychological reactance to health messages? A study of the role played by user commenting and audience metrics in persuasion. Health Communication, 1-13. 

Li, R., & Shen, L. (2022). The Impact of Behavioral Topic on Psychological Reactance: Arousal and Freedom Restoration. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 1-21.

Li, W., Watts, J., & Tan, N. (2019). From screen to screening: entertainment and news television media effects on cancer screening behaviors. Journal of Health Communication, 24(4), 385-394.

Li, W., & Cho, H. (2021). The knowledge gap on social media: Examining roles of engagement and networks. New Media & Society, 14614448211009488.

Liu, J., Yang, X., Lu, Y., & Zheng, X. (2022). The Joint Effects of Social Norm Appeals and Fear Appeals in COVID-19 Vaccine Campaign Posters on Self-Perceived Communication Quality and Vaccination Intention. Frontiers in Psychology, 13.

MacArthur, B. L., Lindenfeld, L. A., Aurbach, E. L., Bevan, B., & Newman, T. P. (2020). Bridging Science with Society: Defining Pathways for Engagement. Communication Center Journal, 6(1), 62-78.

Preis H, Bojsza E, Lindenfeld L, Gan TJ, Pati S. Process evaluation of a medical improvisation program for healthcare communication training. Journal of Communication in Healthcare 2021 Dec 13. DOI: 10.1080/17538068.2021.2012750.

Preis H, Bojsza E, Lindenfeld L, Pati S. Medical improvisation improves communication skills among healthcare professionals. Communication Center Journal 2021, 7(1): 95-107.

Rohan, A. J., Fullerton, J., Escallier, L. A., & Pati, S. (2017). Creating a novel online digital badge-awarding program in patient navigation to address healthcare access. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 33(3), 106-112.

Shen, F., Sheer, V. C., & Li, R. (2015). Impact of narratives on persuasion in health communication: A meta-analysis. Journal of Advertising, 44(2), 105-113

Health and Science Literacy

Cho, H., Cannon, J., Lopez, R., & Li, W. (2022). Social media literacy: A conceptual framework. New Media & Society, 14614448211068530.

Cooper, C. M.,* Rosen, T.,* Kim, H.,* Eaton, N., Cohn, E., Drahota, A., Moskowitz, L., the UCAS Consortium, Lerner, M. D., & Kerns, C. M. (In press). Predictors of expert providers’ familiarity with intervention practices for school- and transition-age youth with ASD. Autism.

Justvig S, Li J, Caravella G, Chen M, Wang H, BenzScott L, Pati S. Improving adherence to care recommendations using a community health worker intervention with the pediatric medical home. Journal of Community Health 2016: Oct 14. PMID: 27743336.

Kerns, C.M., Moskowitz, L., Rosen, T.*, Drahota, A., Wainer, A., Josephson, A.,* Soorya, L., Cohn, E., Chacko, A., & Lerner, M.D. (2019). A multi-site, multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study describing "usual care" intervention practices for school- to transition-age youth with autism. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 48(sup1), S247–S268. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2017.1410826 

Pati, S., Mohamad, Z., Cnaan, A., Kavanagh, J., & Shea, J. A. (2010). Influence of maternal health literacy on child participation in social welfare programs: the Philadelphia experience. American Journal of Public Health, 100(9), 1662-1665.

Pati, S., Feemster, K. A., Mohamad, Z., Fiks, A., Grundmeier, R., & Cnaan, A. (2011). Maternal health literacy and late initiation of immunizations among an inner-city birth cohort. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 15(3), 386-394. 

Pati, S., Siewert, E., Wong, A. T., Bhatt, S. K., Calixte, R. E., & Cnaan, A. (2014). The influence of maternal health literacy and child’s age on participation in social welfare programs. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 18(5), 1176-1189.

Pati S, Ladowski KL, Wong AT, Huang J, Yang J. An enriched medical home intervention using community health workers improves adherence to immunization schedules. Vaccine 2015: Nov 17. PMID: 26435190.  

Pati S, Kavanagh J, Wong A, Bhatt SK, Noonan KG, Cnaan A. Reading level of Medicaid renewal applications. Academic Pediatrics 2012: Jul-Aug;12(4):297-301. PMID: 22682719.

Digital/Social Media and Health Misinformation

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2013). Patient centered medical home resource center. Retrieved fromhttps://www.ahrq.gov/cpi/about/otherwebsites/pcmh.ahrq.gov/index.html 

Bennett, K., & Lyons, Z. (2011). Communication skills in medical education: An integrated approach. Education Research and Perspectives, 38, 45-56.

Bianchi-Hayes J, Schoenfeld E, Cataldo R, Huang J, Pati S. Caregiver preferences regarding technology’s role in supporting adolescent weight management. Int Sch Res Notices 2015: Nov 26. PMID: 27347500.

Bylund, C. L., & Koenig, C. J. (2014). Approaches to studying provider-patient communication. In N. Harrington (Ed.) Handbook of health and communication studies. London: Routledge.

Cho, H., Cannon, J., Lopez, R., & Li, W. (2022). Social media literacy: A conceptual framework. New Media & Society, 14614448211068530.

Conn, L., Reeves, S., Dainty, K., Kenaszchuk, C., & Zwarenstein, M. (2012). Interprofessional communication with hospitalist and consultant physicians in general internal medicine: A qualitative study. BMC Health Services Research, 12, 437-446. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-12-437

Deveugele, M. (2015). Communication training: Skills and beyond. Patient Education and Counseling, 98, 1287-1291.

Emanuel, E. J., & Emanuel, L. L. (1992). Four models of the physician-patient relationship. JAMA, 267, 2221-2226.

Epstein, R. M., & Street, R. L. (2007). Patient-centered communication in cancer care: Promoting healing and reducing suffering. (NIH Publication No. 07-6225). Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute.

Gaffney, S., Farnan, J., Hirsch, K., McGinty, M., Arora, V., Farnan, J. M., & Arora, V. M. (2016). The modified, multi-patient observed simulated handoff experience (M-OSHE): Assessment and feedback for entering residents on handoff performance. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 31, 438-441. doi:10.1007/s11606-016-3591-8

Kramer, A. W., Dusman, H., Tan, L. H.C., Jansen, J. J. M., Grol, R. R. T. M., van der Vleuten, C. P.M. (2004). Acquisition of communication skills in postgraduate training for general practice. Medical Education, 38, 158–167.

Lawlor, J., Thomas, C., Guhin, A.T., Kebyon, K. Lerner, M.D., UCAS Consortium, & Drahota, A. (in press). Suspicious and fraudulent online survey participation: A tutorial and case study utilizing the REAL Framework. Methodological Innovations.

Lazure, P., St-Germain, F., Gryfe, R., Trudeau, M., & Hayes, S.M. (2014). Communication – the foundation for collaborative relationships amongst providers, and between providers and patients: A case in breast and colorectal cancer. Journal of Communication in Healthcare, 7, 41-56.

Li, R., & Sundar, S. S. (2021). Can interactive media attenuate psychological reactance to health messages? A study of the role played by user commenting and audience metrics in persuasion. Health Communication, 1-13.

Li, W., & Cho, H. (2021). The knowledge gap on social media: Examining roles of engagement and networks. New Media & Society, 14614448211009488.

Lucian Leape Institute (2010). Unmet needs: Teaching physicians to provide safe patient care. Boston, MA: National Patient Safety Foundation. https://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Publications/Unmet-Needs-Teaching-Physicians-to-Provide-Safe-Patient-Care.aspx. 

Pearson, S. & Raeke, L. (2000) Patients’ trust in physicians: many theories, few measures and little data. Journal of General Internal Medicine 15, 509–513. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.11002.x.

Preis, H., Bojsza, E., Lindenfeld, L., Gan, T.J., & Pati, S. (2021). Process evaluation of a medical improvisation program for healthcare communication training. Journal of Communication in Healthcare, DOI:10.1080/17538068.2021.2012750.

Real, K. & Buckner, M. (2014). Interprofessional communication: Health care teams and medical interpreters. In N. Harrington (Ed.) Handbook of health and communication studies. London: Routledge.

Rogers, D. A., Lingard, L., Boehler, M. L., Epsin, S., Mellinger, J. D., Schindler, N., & Klingensmith, M. (2013). Surgeons managing conflict in the operating room: Defining the educational need and identifying effective behaviors. The American Journal of Surgery, 205, 125-130.

Ross, L. (2012). Interpersonal skills education for undergraduate nurses and paramedics. Journal of Paramedic Practice, 4, 655-661

Sherrod, D., Collins-McNeil, J., & Sharpe, D. (2013). Practical tips for nurse-physician collaboration. Nursing Management, 44, 44-50.

Smith, C. K., Polis, E., & Hadac, R. R. (1981). Characteristics of initial medical interview associated with patient satisfaction and understanding. The Journal of Family Practice, 12, 283-388.

Sparks, L., & Villagran, M. (2010). Patient and provider interaction. Malden, MA: Polity.

Speroff, T., Nwosu, S., Greevy, R., Weinger, M. B., Talbo, T. R., Wall, R. J., … Dittus, R. S. (2010). Organisational culture: Variation across hospitals and connection to patient safety climate. Quality & Safety in Health Care, 19, 592-596. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2009.039511.

Villagran, M. M., & Weathers, M. R. (2014). Providers’ perspectives on health communication: Influences, processes, and outcomes. In N. Harrington (Ed.) Handbook of health and communication studies. London: Routledge.

Wagner, P., Hendrich, J., Moseley, G., & Hudson, V. (2007). Defining medical professionalism: A qualitative study.Medical Education,41, 288-294.

World Alliance on Patient Safety Drafting Group (2009). Towards an international classification for patient safety: The conceptual framework. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 21, 2–8.

Worth, T. (2012). Saving primary care. Why PCMH and team-based models could rescue and transform healthcare delivery. Medical Economics, 89, 24-31.

Zheng, X., Wu, S., & Nie, D. (2021). Online Health Misinformation and Corrective Messages in China: A Comparison of Message Features. Communication Studies, 72(3), 474-489.

Communicating to Large Audiences: Pairing Messages to People

We designed the Communicating to Large Audiences program based on research that helps identify subgroups of people, learn what their needs and desires are, and develop solutions to meet their needs. 

The basic idea of audience segmentation is to identify smaller subgroups of a larger population whose members are more like each other than members of other segments. In science communication, this process is necessary to create messages that respond to the concerns, needs, and perspectives of specific audiences. 

An excellent example is Yale University’s Program on Climate Change Communication, which created a typology of “Six Americas” that represent six audiences within the American public that each responds to the issue of climate change in a distinct way: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive. These categorizations or segments can help build strategies that enable communicators to target messaging, rather than one statement that is meant to reach all of these individuals. 

Bernhardt, J. M. (2004). Communication at the core of public health. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 2051-2053.

Graffunder, C., & Sakurada, B. (2016). Preparing health care and public health professionals for team performance: The community as a classroom. National Academy of Medicine, pp. 1-14. https://nam.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Preparing-Health-Care-and-Public-Health-Professionals-for-Team-Performance-The-Community-as-Classroom.pdf

Kite, J., Foley, B. C., Grunseit, A. C., & Freeman, B. (2016). Please Like Me: Facebook and Public Health Communication. PLOS ONE, 11(9)

Kreps, G. L., & Maibach, E. W. (2008). Transdisciplinary science: The nexus between communication and public health. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 732–748. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00411.x

Metag, J., & Schäfer, M. S. (2018). Audience segments in environmental and science communication: Recent findings and future perspectives. Environmental Communication, 12, 995-1004. doi: 10.1080/17524032.2018.1521542

National Academy of Sciences (2010). Institute of Medicine (US) Roundtable on the Promotion of Health Equity and the Elimination of Health Disparities. Demographic Changes, a View from California: Implications for Framing Health Disparities: Workshop Summary. Washington DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK220104/ 

Niederdeppe, J., Bigman, C. A., Gonzales, A. L., & Gollust, S. E. (2013). Communication about health disparities in the mass media. Journal of Communication, 63(1), 8–30. 

Shlafer, R. J., McRee, A.-L., Gower, A. L., & Bearinger, L. H. (2016). Better Communication for Better Public Health: Perspectives From an Interdisciplinary Training Program. Health Promotion Practice, 17, 165–168. 

Slater, M. D. (1996). Theory and method in health audience segmentation. Journal of Health Communication, 1(3), 267-283.

Courtroom Communication

Communicating science in the courtroom is an essential aspect of the criminal justice process for any case involving forensic evidence. As forensic methods expand, the number of investigations and trials that rely on this type of evidence is increasing. There are some substantial challenges for forensic scientists to communicate their findings, including the environment and structure of testimonial presentation of results as well as the varied audience, specialized language and adversarial narratives. 

In partnership with the Leverhulme Research Centre for Forensic Science at the University of Dundee, this program, designed for forensic scientists, focuses on how to communicate essential scientific data within the courtroom context. 

Communication of science in the legal context has received limited attention in existing forensic research, although our work in this field pulls from data in juror comprehension, science communication, uncertainty assessment and evaluative opinion formation. 

Cramer, R. J., Brodsky, S. L., & DeCoster, J. (2009). Expert witness confidence and juror personality: Their impact on credibility and persuasion in the courtroom. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 37(1), 63-74.

Eldridge, H. (2019). Juror comprehension of forensic expert testimony: a literature review and gap analysis. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 1, 24-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2019.03.001

Findlay, M. (2008). Juror comprehension and the hard case—Making forensic evidence simpler. International journal of law, crime and justice, 36(1), 15-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsl.2007.07.001

Garrett, B. L., Gardner, B. O., Murphy, E., & Grimes, P. (2021). Judges and forensic science education: A national survey. Forensic Science International, 321, 110714.

Georgiou, N., Morgan, R. M., & French, J. C. (2020). Conceptualising, evaluating and communicating uncertainty in forensic science: Identifying commonly used tools through an interdisciplinary configurative review. Science & Justice, 60(4), 313-336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2020.04.002

Hackman, L. (2021). Communication, forensic science, and the law. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Forensic Science, 3(2), e1396.  https://doi.org/10.1002/wfs2.1396

Howes, L. (2015) The communication of forensic science in the criminal justice system: a review of theory and proposed directions for research. Sci. Justice 55, 145–154, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2014.11.002

Howes L, M. (2015) Towards coherent co-presentation of expert evidence in criminal trials: experiences of communication between forensic scientists and legal practitioners. Criminal Law J. 39, 252–271 21 

Howes, L.M. and Kemp, N. (2017) Discord in the communication of forensic science: can the science of language help foster shared understanding? J. Lang. Soc. Psychol. 36, 96–111 https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X16663589

Koehler, J. J., Schweitzer, N. J., Saks, M. J., & McQuiston, D. E. (2016). Science, technology, or the expert witness: What influences jurors’ judgments about forensic science testimony? Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 22(4), 401–413. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000103

MacArthur, B.; Hackman, L., & Lindenfeld, L., (2021). Training for Communication in Forensic Science. Emerging Topics in Life Sciences, August 9,https://doi.org/10.1042/ETLS20200296.

McQuiston-Surrett, D. and Saks, M.J. (2007) Communicating opinion evidence in the forensic identification sciences: accuracy and impact. Hastings Law J. 59, 1159

McQuiston-Surrett, D. and Saks, M.J. (2009) The testimony of forensic identification science: what expert witnesses say and what factfinders hear. Law Hum. Behav. 33, 436 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-008-9169-1

Rowden, E., & Wallace, A. (2019). Performing expertise: The design of audiovisual links and the construction of the remote expert witness in court. Social & Legal Studies, 28(5), 698-718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663918802991

Sanders, J. (2009). Science, law, and the expert witness. Law and contemporary problems, 72(1), 63-90. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40647166

Searcy, M., Duck, S., & Blanck, P. (2005). Communication in the courtroom and the “appearance” of justice. Applications of nonverbal communication, 41-62.

Smith, L. L., Bull, R., & Holliday, R. (2011). Understanding juror perceptions of forensic evidence: Investigating the impact of case context on perceptions of forensic evidence strength. Journal of forensic sciences, 56(2), 409-414. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2010.01671.x

Wilcox, A. M., & NicDaeid, N. (2018). Jurors’ perceptions of forensic science expert witnesses: experience, qualifications, testimony style and credibility. Forensic science international, 291, 100-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.07.030

Women in STEM Leadership Program

Women and other underrepresented minorities are pioneering research and innovations in STEM, contributing to changing the world, and bolstering the economy. Despite growing awareness of the importance of diverse, equitable and inclusive approaches to STEM, these populations continue to face obstacles to career success and difficulties in achieving leadership roles. Several initiatives have been launched in response, and some advances have been made. Nonetheless, women and other underrepresented minorities still make up only a fraction of the STEM workforce in the United States.

The Women in STEM Leadership Program is based on the latest social-science research and designed to empower women and their allies in fostering a more diverse, equitable and inclusive STEM culture that allows all STEM professionals to thrive in their careers.

Barabino, G., Frize, M., Ibrahim, F. et al.Solutions to Gender Balance in STEM Fields Through Support, Training, Education and Mentoring: Report of the International Women in Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering Task Group. Sci Eng Ethics26, 275–292 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00097-0

DuBow, W. & Gonzalez, J.J. (2020) NCWIT Scorecard: The Status of Women in Technology. Boulder, CO: NCWIT.

Ely, R. J., Ibarra, H., & Kolb, D. M. (2011). Taking gender into account: Theory and design for women's leadership development programs. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(3), 474-493.

Lindeman, M. I. H., Durik, A. M., & Dooley, M. (2019). Women and Self-Promotion: A Test of Three Theories. Psychological Reports, 122(1), 219–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294118755096

McCullough, L. (2020). “Barriers and Assistance for Female Leaders in Academic STEM in the US.” Educ. Sci.10(10), 264; https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/10/10/264

McCullough, L. (2020). “Proportions of Women in STEM Leadership in the Academy in the USA” Education Sciences 10(1), 1.

McCullough, L. (2011). “Women’s Leadership in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Barriers to Participation.” Forum on Public Policy Online 2011(2). (August 2011). This paper was presented at the March 2011 Oxford Round Table on Women in the Academy: Progress and Prospects.

Noonan, R. (2017). Women in STEM: 2017 Update. ESA Issue Brief# 06-17. US Department of Commerce.

O’Bannon, D. J., Garavalia, L., Renz, D. O., & McCarther, S. M. (2010). Successful leadership development for women STEM faculty. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 10(4), 167-173.

Phillips, K. W. (2014). How diversity makes us smarter. scientificamerican.com.

Sugiyama, K., Cavanagh, K. V., van Esch, C., Bilimoria, D., & Brown, C. (2016). Inclusive leadership development: Drawing from pedagogies of women’s and general leadership development programs. Journal of Management Education, 40(3), 253-292.

Van Oosten, E. B., Buse, K., & Bilimoria, D. (2017). The leadership lab for women: Advancing and retaining women in STEM through professional development. Frontiers in Psychology, 2138.