Related Experiment Videos
Narrative and "Anti-narrative" in Science: How Scientists Tell Stories, and Don't
1Department of Integrative Biology and Museum of Paleontology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.
Integrative and Comparative Biology
|June 7, 2018
Summary
Scientists use narratives to explain complex topics, but scientific writing often obscures these stories. Adopting classic storytelling techniques can improve science communication and public engagement.
Area of Science:
- Science communication
- Narrative theory
- Scientific writing
Background:
- Narratives are fundamental to scientific explanation, not exclusive to humanities.
- Scientific discourse often uses a formulaic structure that hinders narrative clarity.
- Previous work highlights parallels between literary and scientific storytelling.
Purpose of the Study:
- To explore the role of narrative in scientific understanding and communication.
- To introduce 'Secularity' as a third domain alongside Science and Religion.
- To advocate for the integration of classic storytelling techniques in science.
Main Methods:
- Review of existing literature on narrative in science and literature.
- Analysis of the structure of scientific explanations (e.g., peer-reviewed papers).
- Conceptual framework integrating narrative theory with scientific practice.
Main Results:
- Scientific writing structures (e.g., 'question, methods, materials') create an 'anti-narrative'.
- Over-reliance on narrative assumptions (e.g., natural selection) without empirical testing is problematic.
- Classic storytelling elements can be adapted to enhance scientific communication.
Conclusions:
- Adopting storytelling techniques can make scientific ideas clearer to non-scientists.
- Improved science communication can enhance public education and funding acquisition.
- Rethinking scientific narrative structures is crucial for effective knowledge dissemination.