Science communication

Cognitive neuroscientist Linda Drijvers was signed up by her supervisor during her PhD for Faces of Sciences: young scientists who blog and vlog about their research. After a few months, she stood bloodied up on a big stage during a Science battle. Then the requests poured in and before she knew it, she was presenting her research at Lowlands and at the University of the Netherlands.

Beforehand, she had never imagined that she would be so involved in science communication as a researcher. But she had only just started her PhD project or she was already on a stage explaining her research to a large audience. 'My supervisor signed me up early on for Faces of Science and from there I was asked to participate in the Science battle for PhD students. I presented my research in ten minutes, all by myself on a big stage, with no handhold of powerpoint slides. I found that very exciting.'

From then on, requests kept coming and the researcher stood at all kinds of events: from public lectures to food markets and festivals such as Mundial, the Weekend of Science and Lowlands. Later, the University of the Netherlands recorded a video with her. 'From a lay audience you get very different questions than from scientists, louder too, questions like: 'Should tax money go to this? People often see less value in alpha research than in medical research, for example. It was great fun that people were often convinced by the end of my talk, for instance when I had told them how my research can improve communication or develop hearing tests. I also explained how we understand each other better in crowded environments using hand gestures. People in festival situations could immediately take those insights into practice.

Sometimes too little time

Although I didn't plan to perform at festivals beforehand, I do think it suits me well. I always liked presenting, so this was a great opportunity to grow in that. I now also encourage my PhD students to do this kind of thing, because it teaches you how to make a compelling story of your research. Of course, not everyone needs to go on a stage, but if you want to, there are plenty of opportunities. Discuss it with your supervisor, who often gets a lot of requests to give talks and can then put you forward from time to time. And if you have interesting new research, always inform the science communication department.

Of course, it does take a lot of time, which I sometimes found difficult. Sometimes, for instance, I did a theatre performance in Drenthe in the evening and didn't get home until the middle of the night. And I couldn't always just spend a day working on a blog, because of course I had to write a dissertation. Nowadays, fortunately, PhD students do get more room for that kind of thing.

Thanks a lot

But in the end, I benefited a lot. Once you have given such public lectures, you are asked for more and more. I regularly appeared on the radio and the more I was heard there, the more requests I received. I also built up a large network. During these science battles I met many other PhD students, which in turn led to collaborations. Such a network is also useful if, for example, you want someone from another field to look at your research proposal. When grants are awarded, it also counts what you have done in terms of outreach. Of course, I'm not sure if I owe later research funding to my public appearances, but the publicity I gained from it surely helped.'

In February 2022, PhD student Kiane de Kleijne and her colleagues published a paper with an uncomfortable message: a group of technologies that numerous companies worldwide are using to curb CO2 emissions are insufficient to meet the standards envisaged in the Paris climate agreement. A wave of interview requests from Dutch and international press followed. 'I had really nice conversations with journalists,' she said.

Since her research was published, De Kleijne is still occasionally approached by journalists who want to check something with her as an expert. 'I always enjoy that. It often turns out that I can tell useful things. Journalists usually also ask really interesting questions. Sometimes they are questions you haven't thought about at first, but they are relevant. As a scientist, it is sometimes hard to keep seeing: what does something mean, and who really benefits from this? These conversations helped me further in thinking about what I want to do with my research.'

Leap of faith

'It was the first time I had received so much media attention for my research. I had prepared tremendously well, because I was quite nervous about the questions that might come my way. But in my experience, you can prepare so well, but you also just have to go and do it. It is a leap of faith, but it is the only way to get the hang of it. I am much less nervous now when a journalist contacts me.'

Checking quotes

'What I also learnt is that journalists from different countries handle having their pieces read in advance differently. Dutch journalists usually wanted me to check their pieces and this allowed me to add nuance to my story. But other journalists from the United States or England, for example, did not give me the opportunity to check my quotes at all. This made me feel I had to be even sharper in what I said, it cost me more energy to give these interviews.'

'So a tip I would give to others is to make clear agreements at the beginning of the interview about counter-reading quotes. Even though it was uncomfortable at times, it did lead to quotes that I was completely behind.'

'All in all, I had really nice conversations with journalists. They were usually genuinely very interested in my research. On reflection, I thought it was more exciting than necessary beforehand. That's why I would pass on to young researchers who are going to talk to the press: 'Just have a bit of fun with it too, and the world really doesn't end if you don't know something.'

In 2017, findings in German nature reserves brought the decline of insects to the centre of attention. Professor Hans de Kroon coordinated the research, resulting in numerous media appearances and talks with policymakers.

De Kroon sees it as a gamechanger in his career as a scientist. 'My research has broken new ground, which would never have happened if we had not published these findings. I am now constantly working on the core: what do these results really have to say? In the years that followed publication, I did my story just about every week: in front of the European Parliament, in The Hague, at the Provinces and the Water Boards.'

Phone red hot

'I was initially surprised, though, by the overwhelming media coverage of the paper in 2017, in which we showed that over three-quarters of insects in German nature reserves had disappeared. As researchers, we were already looking at the numbers for a while, so for me it was not news that insects were doing badly. There had also been a piece in the Volkskrant, but it had received little attention at the time. But after the press release about this study, the phone rang red hot for three days. We had apparently touched a very sensitive nerve.

And then suddenly you are in the middle of it. In Germany in particular, there was also considerable criticism. Some people wanted to smear us, to show that our results were wrong, that it was not science but activism. But fortunately it never got personal. We were then supported by scientists from all walks of life. And also the university's communications department and the board of governors gave us practical and moral support. That has been very important for us.

Not always responding

I learned that you don't have to react to everything, that you shouldn't be too defensive as a scientist. Some are not out to engage in dialogue, but just want to spout their own ideas or vent frustrations. Responding to this is unfortunately pointless.

At one point, we put a short commentary online explaining without jargon how we had done our research and what we now know. This was then picked up by the Frankfurter Allgemeine and led to a nice story about our work and all the dissent. We also now occasionally write opinion articles with several scientists in which we list everything we know. I would advise other scientists: Stick to your own strengths. You know what you have found in your research, trust your good science and the unique contribution you can make to the public debate.'

Historian Coen van Galen started crowdfunding to finance his research project. There was a lot of enthusiasm for that action and it got him media attention. A few years later, the media still know how to find him.

At a certain point, funding for a new research project, which Coen van Galen and his colleagues wanted to use to ensure that the Surinamese slave registers would become public, failed to materialise. 'Eventually, as a stopgap measure, we started a crowdfunding campaign,' the historian explains. 'That turned out to be a golden move. It attracted a lot of media attention, which in turn generated additional funding, for example from the Prince Bernhard Culture Fund.'

'The time was clearly ripe for more attention to the slavery past. The zwartepietdiscussion was again widely held and there was a need for more inclusive historiography. Many people thought our research was important, so there was a kind of snowball effect of messages about the campaign and people telling each other about the action. Ultimately, I think that campaign is the reason I am still in academia.'

Stage fright

I found my way to the media quite easily. Before I started my PhD project in 2010, I had worked as a journalist at the regional broadcaster for a few years, so I already had contacts and knew a bit about what kind of stories media like to hear. I had also used this knowledge during my PhD, by telling a lot about that research in the media. For that, I even won the Hermesdorf Talent Prize in 2016.

Also during the slavery project, I received more and more invitations from editors to come and talk about the registers and the research. But to then actually say something on radio or television was still a step for me: I suffered from stage fright. I prepared myself very well, so that I knew exactly what to say. That helped enormously and I still do it that way.

In control

As long as you remain in control of what information comes out, you can gain a lot from publicity. I often say to my PhD students: you have to be the driver of your own bus and create space for yourself. Of course, in a way that suits you: not everyone needs to be on television. Some are good at dealing with large audiences, others are better at teaching or working behind the scenes.

But if you do enjoy it, I would definitely try to get on radio or television. Once you have been in the national media, editors often keep following you. As recently as 2021, for instance, the NOS Journaal shared our call for volunteers to help map the Surinamese population between 1830 and 1950. A lot of applications came in for that. Our research owes a lot to all that attention.'