Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
Opinion

Opinion: Lay summaries needed to enhance science communication

Lauren M. Kuehne and Julian D. Olden
  1. School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98105

See allHide authors and affiliations

PNAS March 24, 2015 112 (12) 3585-3586; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1500882112
Lauren M. Kuehne
School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98105
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julian D. Olden
School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98105
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: olden@uw.edu
  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

At first blush, the notion of lay summaries seems a simple idea with admirable aims: Scientists write summaries of journal articles emphasizing the broad significance of research in accessible language. However, viewed from an ivory tower that has been besieged by an increasing amount of paperwork, scientists could easily regard lay summaries as just one more hurdle in peer-reviewed publishing, another administrative task to fit into an already busy agenda.

But rather than an unrewarding burden, scientists (and journal publishers) should consider widespread adoption of lay summaries—accompanying online publications and made publicly available with traditional abstracts—as a way to increase the visibility, impact, and transparency of scientific research. This is a particularly important undertaking given the changing science media landscape.

There are clear professional benefits to increasing visibility of one’s own research through broad communication. Disparate studies show consistent connections between public communication, increased visibility of research, and greater numbers of citations (e.g., refs. 1 and 2). Concerns voiced by scientists that public communication is time-consuming, too difficult, and even professionally risky (3) contrast strongly with research documenting that scientists who engage in public communication enjoy an enhanced reputation among peers, and rate contacts with media as generally positive and beneficial to their careers (2, 4). Furthermore, scientists who engage in public communication tend to be more academically productive; few experience negative career impacts from these activities (5). Journalists also value and cultivate connections with scientists who can communicate clearly and accessibly (6). At best, scientists could view lay summaries as opportunities to contextualize their research and communicate with interested nonspecialists. But regardless, they could serve as building blocks for broad and transparent communication of research.

The value of lay summaries increases when considered within the radically changing science media landscape. There is little debate that dissemination of research and scientific news is undergoing a sweeping change (7). Greater reliance on the Internet for scientific information is transforming communication pathways from a traditional top-down transfer of knowledge to one where readers play a much more active role in acquiring information and agenda setting (8). Within the general public, 87% of online users rely on the Internet for research activities like fact-checking or looking up scientific terms (9), and evidence suggests that the public are using increasingly diverse sources of information (e.g., blogs and social media) (7, 10).

Meanwhile, science journalism is fundamentally changing. Along with traditional duties of investigative reporting and agenda setting, a plethora of information and more collaborative relationships with readers is emphasizing new roles, such as curator and convener (8). The number of content producers equates to availability of diverse perspectives on research findings, leading respected scholars in science communication to propose that a “media ecosystem” more accurately depicts the way scientific knowledge is transferred today (8). We have conceptualized the science media ecosystem (Fig. 1) to illustrate both the limitations of current communication pathways and the potential for lay summaries to increase access to and communication of research findings.

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

A conceptual map depicts the pathways available for communicating research results between scientists and end users via different mechanisms (depicted by black dotted lines). Lay summaries of published articles would serve to enhance potential communication pathways (depicted by red solid lines) between scientists and the lay public, increase decision makers' access to information, and improve interdisciplinary communication.

The traditional pathway through legacy media (television, radio, and print) effectively reaches wide audiences, but is limited in scope with at most 3 of every 1,000 published articles gaining attention from mass media (11). This pathway is increasingly constrained by reductions in science media staffing, leading to more exclusive reliance on press releases from major scientific journals for story ideas and content (6). Not only is this an unlikely avenue to encourage comprehensive access to research findings, but it is actually trending toward loss of information diversity and homogenization of science news (6, 12). Blogging and social media have transformed the media ecosystem, and many scientists have adopted this route to make material directly available to interested audiences. The primary limitations of this pathway are its uncertain reach, the perceived and actual credibility of these sources, and self-selection by scientists as to whether to broaden communication of their research (6, 10).

Lay summaries would significantly increase the number of linkages in the media ecosystem by creating reliable, direct pathways between scientists and the general public, journalists, resource managers, decision makers, and scientists outside of the discipline (Fig. 1). In the changing media landscape, scientists should proactively seek ways to keep their research relevant and in the public eye; lay summaries offer an opportunity to stake a claim in the media ecosystem without necessarily navigating every trend in information-sharing from YouTube to Reddit. We believe journalists (working to cover disparate topics on tight deadlines) would especially benefit from accessible and creditable summaries written from a broad perspective (6, 12), which could help level the playing field for important research currently overlooked by mass media. Furthermore, by relating the significance of the work in the author’s own words, lay summaries are a proactive measure against a common fear of scientists that their work will be misinterpreted or misrepresented in the media.

Finally, scientists could embrace lay summaries as a way of taking up the gauntlet of the social contract and science communication in a new way. Although scientists are generally receptive to the need for science communication, Peters (13) documented a striking trend in the hard sciences of strongly differentiating between public versus internal scientific communication. This clear distinction between communication “arenas” sets up a dynamic where the public are consumers (as opposed to creators or cocreators) and scientists hold complex, inaccessible knowledge requiring translation. It has been subsequently suggested that communication that bridges the two arenas may facilitate knowledge transfers between science and civil society (10); lay summaries occur to us as one such mechanism. Writing a lay summary means that a scientist has taken the time to consider and describe their work from perspectives outside of the scientific community (14). It is an invitation for public dialogue, and runs counter to deficit-model thinking, which is still a dominant perspective in the scientific community (15).

Requiring lay summaries does present some practical considerations, the primary one being limited training for scientists in broad communication skills (15). We propose, however, that support for individual scientists exists in the form of published (14) and in-person training opportunities (16), as well as journal guidelines and peer-review networks (Box 1). Public information offices generally support scientists’ efforts in communicating their research; we suggest that these departments could offer additional training for scientists in writing lay summaries as a means to increase the reach and impact of institutional products.

Box 1.

A scientist’s brief guide to lay summaries

Although formats vary, some journals—among them PLOS Biology, PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, PLOS Genetics, PNAS, Behavioral Ecology, Functional Ecology, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment—have developed criteria for synopses aimed at a more general audience, thus offering guidance for journal publishers who are considering the requirement of lay summaries. (PNAS requires submission of a 120-word Significance Statement with research articles explaining the relevance to a broad readership.)

However, scientists who have trained for years using highly technical and specific language may find writing meaningful lay summaries a daunting prospect. Achieving a balance between accuracy and accessibility is not an easy task, but (we argue) a worthwhile one. Fortunately, excellent published resources exist to guide scientists in writing for general audiences (e.g., N. Baron’s Escape from the Ivory Tower and R. Olson’s Don’t Be Such a Scientist) and even specifically in writing lay summaries (14). Based on our review of these resources, scientists faced with crafting their first lay summary might consider these tips:

  • A lay summary differs in intent and should not be considered a “dumbed-down” version of the standard abstract. The lay summary should focus on the significance of the research with respect to the central or fundamental questions in the field (i.e., the “why and so what?” rather than the “how?”).

  • Make use of available resources, such as university public information offices, published guides and books, including online tools to simplify writing style (e.g., www.readability-score.com).

  • Make use of lay persons and peers in other disciplines for feedback and review along the way, which will help in avoiding acronyms, jargon, and other forms of inaccessible language.

  • Embrace the adage “practice makes perfect” and expect improvement in skill over time.

The literature is replete with analysis of trends and issues in science communication, but somewhat lacking in concrete proposals that are simple to test and implement. We recommend that journal publishers provide the platform for online publication of lay summaries. We also suggest that scientists working in different disciplines and contexts consider and make use of lay summaries as a concrete way to increase the visibility and accessibility of their research, ensure a voice for research findings in the emerging science media landscape, and forward the goals of the social contract.

Acknowledgments

We thank Virginia Gewin for comments that greatly improved the manuscript. J.D.O. was supported by the H. Mason Keeler Endowed Professorship (School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington).

Footnotes

  • ↵1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: olden{at}uw.edu.
  • Author contributions: L.M.K. and J.D.O. wrote the paper.

  • Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Thelwall M,
    2. Haustein S,
    3. Larivière V,
    4. Sugimoto CR
    (2013) Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLOS ONE 8(5):e64841
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Liang X, et al.
    (2014) Building buzz: (Scientists) communicating science in new media environments. Journalism Mass Commun Q 91(4):772–791
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. ↵
    1. Ecklund EH,
    2. James SA,
    3. Lincoln AE
    (2012) How academic biologists and physicists view science outreach. PLOS ONE 7(5):e36240
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Peters HP, et al.
    (2008) Science communication. Interactions with the mass media. Science 321(5886):204–205
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Jensen P,
    2. Rouquier J-B,
    3. Kreimer P,
    4. Croissant Y
    (2008) Scientists who engage with society perform better academically. Sci Public Policy 35(7):527–541
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Amend E,
    2. Secko DM
    (2012) In the face of critique: A metasynthesis of the experiences of journalists covering health and science. Sci Commun 34(2):241–282
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Brossard D
    (2013) New media landscapes and the science information consumer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110(Suppl 3):14096–14101
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Fahy D,
    2. Nisbet MC
    (2011) The science journalist online: Shifting roles and emerging practices. Journalism 12(7):778–793
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Horrigan JB
    (2006) The Internet as a Resource for News and Information Science (Pew Internet & American Life Project, Washington, DC) Available at www.pewinternet.org/2006/11/20/the-internet-as-a-resource-for-news-and-information-about-science. Accessed July 1, 2014
    .
  10. ↵
    1. Peters HP,
    2. Dunwoody S,
    3. Allgaier J,
    4. Lo Y-Y,
    5. Brossard D
    (2014) Public communication of science 2.0: Is the communication of science via the “new media” online a genuine transformation or old wine in new bottles? EMBO Rep 15(7):749–753
    .
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Suleski J,
    2. Ibaraki M
    (2010) Scientists are talking, but mostly to each other: A quantitative analysis of research represented in mass media. Public Underst Sci 19(1):115–125
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    1. Granado A
    (2011) Slaves to journals, serfs to the web: The use of the internet in newsgathering among European science journalists. Journalism 12(7):794–813
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Peters HP
    (2013) Gap between science and media revisited: Scientists as public communicators. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110(Suppl 3):14102–14109
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Dubé CE,
    2. Lapane KL
    (2014) Lay abstracts and summaries: Writing advice for scientists. J Cancer Educ 29(3):577–579
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Besley JC,
    2. Tanner AH
    (2011) What science communication scholars think about training scientists to communicate. Sci Commun 33(2):239–263
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Kuehne LM, et al.
    (2014) Practical science communication strategies for graduate students. Conserv Biol 28(5):1225–1235
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Opinion: Lay summaries needed to enhance science communication
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Lay summaries enhance science communication
Lauren M. Kuehne, Julian D. Olden
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Mar 2015, 112 (12) 3585-3586; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1500882112

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Lay summaries enhance science communication
Lauren M. Kuehne, Julian D. Olden
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Mar 2015, 112 (12) 3585-3586; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1500882112
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 112 (12)
Table of Contents

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Setting sun over a sun-baked dirt landscape
Core Concept: Popular integrated assessment climate policy models have key caveats
Better explicating the strengths and shortcomings of these models will help refine projections and improve transparency in the years ahead.
Image credit: Witsawat.S.
Model of the Amazon forest
News Feature: A sea in the Amazon
Did the Caribbean sweep into the western Amazon millions of years ago, shaping the region’s rich biodiversity?
Image credit: Tacio Cordeiro Bicudo (University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil), Victor Sacek (University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil), and Lucy Reading-Ikkanda (artist).
Syrian archaeological site
Journal Club: In Mesopotamia, early cities may have faltered before climate-driven collapse
Settlements 4,200 years ago may have suffered from overpopulation before drought and lower temperatures ultimately made them unsustainable.
Image credit: Andrea Ricci.
Steamboat Geyser eruption.
Eruption of Steamboat Geyser
Mara Reed and Michael Manga explore why Yellowstone's Steamboat Geyser resumed erupting in 2018.
Listen
Past PodcastsSubscribe
Birds nestling on tree branches
Parent–offspring conflict in songbird fledging
Some songbird parents might improve their own fitness by manipulating their offspring into leaving the nest early, at the cost of fledgling survival, a study finds.
Image credit: Gil Eckrich (photographer).

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
  • List of Issues

PNAS Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science
  • Teaching Resources

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Subscribers
  • Librarians
  • Press
  • Site Map
  • PNAS Updates
  • FAQs
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Rights & Permissions
  • About
  • Contact

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490