Abstract
A cultural approach to science communication emphasizes the role that identity, experience, narratives and emotion play in the ways individuals construct meaning and interpret the world. I identify as a poet and poetry is my emotive communication medium. This research therefore aims to explore to what extent my poetry fosters an affective engagement experience with a humanised account of science. The role of narratives and emotion were explored as predictors of interest in scientific research. This study highlights the value of interdisciplinary approaches to the communication of science.
A sequential mixed methodology was used to quantify and qualify engagement experiences with my poetry, recounting the personal story of a scientist (Scientist’s Story) and her research in translational cancer (Research). The first stage (Study 1) surveyed participants (n = 580) recruited online through a crowdsourcing platform, Mechanical Turk. I authored the content and communicated it through audios that I also voiced. Response to my poetry was compared with responses to narrative and descriptive versions of the same content. Engagement experiences were compared across conditions using a three-dimensional construct, with corresponding scales for State Empathy for the scientist, Narrative Engagement and Feelings Elicited. The survey design included two phases: engagement experiences with the Scientist’s Story followed by engagement experiences with the Research. After the first phase, participants could decide whether to continue to the Research content or exit the survey. This behavioural measure was a proxy for interest to engage in the research.
The survey was followed up with a qualitative in-depth exploration of engagement experiences with my poetry with a subset of survey participants (n = 9) through semi-structured interviews. Comments from these interviews was used to improve my poetry delivery, and feedback was incorporated into the final stage of the study. This final stage (Study 2) re-implemented the original survey design to compare the different poetry conditions (n = 797), which were improved, primed and written variations. Data from both surveys were then pooled together for further comparisons and analysis (n = 1184).
Though there were instances when audio condition (Poetry, Narrative, Descriptive) yielded significant differences in engagement experiences, the effect sizes were small. Variation in these engagement responses was more heavily dependent on two separate self-reported variables relating to participant identity: Interest in Science and Liking for Poetry. Participants who reported having a higher interest in science as well as participants reporting liking poetry more, both scored higher values in their engagement experiences, in response to both the Scientist’s Story and Research podcasts.
Engagement experience scores with the Scientist’s Story were significantly greater than those with the Research, and experiencing positive feelings when listening to the personal story of the scientist was the strongest predictor for interest to engage with the science content that followed. Priming participants with the knowledge that the content was poetry had an adverse effect on their engagement experiences, potentially influenced by prior mental schema and expectations of poetry forms and delivery.
Showcasing the personal story of the scientist elicited positive feelings, which in turn fostered interest in the scientist’s research. This study substantiates the value of affective experiences in fostering interest and engagement with science. Although there is still much research to be done to better understand the role of poetry, in all its forms, within the practice of science communication, the present study highlights the potential of targeting self-acclaimed poetry lovers as a receptive audience for science stories.