OPINION

OPINION

Opinion: Lay summaries needed to enhance

science communication
Lauren M. Kuehne and Julian D. Olden1
a much more active role in acquiring infor-
School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98105
mation and agenda setting (8). Within the
general public, 87% of online users rely on
At first blush, the notion of lay summaries consuming, too difficult, and even profession- the Internet for research activities like fact-
seems a simple idea with admirable aims: ally risky (3) contrast strongly with research checking or looking up scientific terms (9),
Scientists write summaries of journal articles documenting that scientists who engage in and evidence suggests that the public are us-
emphasizing the broad significance of re- public communication enjoy an enhanced rep- ing increasingly diverse sources of informa-
search in accessible language. However, utation among peers, and rate contacts with tion (e.g., blogs and social media) (7, 10).
viewed from an ivory tower that has been media as generally positive and beneficial to Meanwhile, science journalism is funda-
besieged by an increasing amount of paper- their careers (2, 4). Furthermore, scientists mentally changing. Along with traditional
work, scientists could easily regard lay sum- who engage in public communication tend duties of investigative reporting and agenda
maries as just one more hurdle in peer- to be more academically productive; few expe- setting, a plethora of information and more
reviewed publishing, another administrative rience negative career impacts from these ac- collaborative relationships with readers is
task to fit into an already busy agenda. tivities (5). Journalists also value and cultivate emphasizing new roles, such as curator and
But rather than an unrewarding burden, connections with scientists who can commu- convener (8). The number of content pro-
scientists (and journal publishers) should con- nicate clearly and accessibly (6). At best, ducers equates to availability of diverse per-
sider widespread adoption of lay summaries— scientists could view lay summaries as oppor- spectives on research findings, leading re-
accompanying online publications and made tunities to contextualize their research and spected scholars in science communication
publicly available with traditional abstracts— to propose that a “media ecosystem” more
communicate with interested nonspecialists.
as a way to increase the visibility, impact, and accurately depicts the way scientific knowl-
But regardless, they could serve as building
transparency of scientific research. This is a edge is transferred today (8). We have con-
blocks for broad and transparent communi-
particularly important undertaking given the ceptualized the science media ecosystem (Fig.
cation of research.
1) to illustrate both the limitations of current
changing science media landscape. The value of lay summaries increases when
There are clear professional benefits to communication pathways and the potential
considered within the radically changing
for lay summaries to increase access to and
increasing visibility of one’s own research science media landscape. There is little debate
communication of research findings.
through broad communication. Disparate that dissemination of research and scientific
The traditional pathway through legacy
studies show consistent connections between news is undergoing a sweeping change (7).
media (television, radio, and print) effectively
public communication, increased visibility of Greater reliance on the Internet for scientific
reaches wide audiences, but is limited in
research, and greater numbers of citations information is transforming communication
scope with at most 3 of every 1,000 published
(e.g., refs. 1 and 2). Concerns voiced by sci- pathways from a traditional top-down trans-
articles gaining attention from mass media
entists that public communication is time- fer of knowledge to one where readers play
(11). This pathway is increasingly con-
strained by reductions in science media staff-
ing, 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 compre-
hensive 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 ma-
terial directly available to interested audiences.
The primary limitations of this pathway are its
uncertain reach, the perceived and actual

Author contributions: L.M.K. and J.D.O. wrote the paper.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations ex-

Fig. 1. A conceptual map depicts the pathways available for communicating research results between scientists and pressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily
end users via different mechanisms (depicted by black dotted lines). Lay summaries of published articles would serve reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences.
to enhance potential communication pathways (depicted by red solid lines) between scientists and the lay public, 1
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: olden@
increase decision makers’ access to information, and improve interdisciplinary communication. uw.edu.

www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1500882112 PNAS | March 24, 2015 | vol. 112 | no. 12 | 3585–3586

 that communication that bridges the two
Box 1. A scientist’s brief guide to lay summaries
arenas may facilitate knowledge transfers be-
Although formats vary, some journals—among them PLOS Biology, PLOS Neglected
tween science and civil society (10); lay sum-
Tropical Diseases, PLOS Genetics, PNAS, Behavioral Ecology, Functional Ecology,
maries occur to us as one such mechanism.
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment—have developed criteria for synopses aimed
Writing a lay summary means that a scientist
at a more general audience, thus offering guidance for journal publishers who are
has taken the time to consider and describe
considering the requirement of lay summaries. (PNAS requires submission of a
their work from perspectives outside of the
120-word Significance Statement with research articles explaining the relevance to a
scientific community (14). It is an invitation
broad readership.)
for public dialogue, and runs counter to deficit-
However, scientists who have trained for years using highly technical and specific
model thinking, which is still a dominant per-
language may find writing meaningful lay summaries a daunting prospect. Achieving
spective in the scientific community (15).
a balance between accuracy and accessibility is not an easy task, but (we argue) a worth-
Requiring lay summaries does present some
while one. Fortunately, excellent published resources exist to guide scientists in writing for
practical considerations, the primary one being
general audiences (e.g., N. Baron’s Escape from the Ivory Tower and R. Olson’s Don’t Be
limited training for scientists in broad com-
Such a Scientist) and even specifically in writing lay summaries (14). Based on our review
munication skills (15). We propose, however,
of these resources, scientists faced with crafting their first lay summary might consider
that support for individual scientists exists in
these tips:
the form of published (14) and in-person train-
A lay summary differs in intent and should not be considered a “dumbed-down” version of ing opportunities (16), as well as journal guide-
the standard abstract. The lay summary should focus on the significance of the research with lines and peer-review networks (Box 1). Public
respect to the central or fundamental questions in the field (i.e., the “why and so what?” information offices generally support scientists’
rather than the “how?”). efforts in communicating their research; we
suggest that these departments could offer ad-
Make use of available resources, such as university public information offices, published
ditional training for scientists in writing lay
guides and books, including online tools to simplify writing style (e.g., www.readability-
summaries as a means to increase the reach
score.com).
and impact of institutional products.
Make use of lay persons and peers in other disciplines for feedback and review along The literature is replete with analysis of
the way, which will help in avoiding acronyms, jargon, and other forms of inaccessible trends and issues in science communication,
language. but somewhat lacking in concrete proposals
that are simple to test and implement. We
Embrace the adage “practice makes perfect” and expect improvement in skill over time. recommend that journal publishers provide the
platform for online publication of lay summa-
ries. We also suggest that scientists working in
credibility of these sources, and self-selec- in a new way. Although scientists are generally different disciplines and contexts consider and
tion by scientists as to whether to broaden receptive to the need for science communi- make use of lay summaries as a concrete way to
communication of their research (6, 10). cation, Peters (13) documented a striking increase the visibility and accessibility of their
Lay summaries would significantly increase trend in the hard sciences of strongly differen- research, ensure a voice for research findings in
the number of linkages in the media ecosys- tiating between public versus internal scientific the emerging science media landscape, and
tem by creating reliable, direct pathways communication. This clear distinction between forward the goals of the social contract.
between scientists and the general public, communication “arenas” sets up a dynamic
journalists, resource managers, decision mak- where the public are consumers (as opposed ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. We thank Virginia Gewin for
ers, and scientists outside of the discipline to creators or cocreators) and scientists hold comments that greatly improved the manuscript. J.D.O.
was supported by the H. Mason Keeler Endowed Pro-
(Fig. 1). In the changing media landscape, sci- complex, inaccessible knowledge requiring fessorship (School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University
entists should proactively seek ways to keep translation. It has been subsequently suggested of Washington).
their research relevant and in the public eye;
lay summaries offer an opportunity to stake
a claim in the media ecosystem without nec- 1 Thelwall M, Haustein S, Larivière V, Sugimoto CR (2013) Do 20/the-internet-as-a-resource-for-news-and-information-about-
altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLOS ONE science. Accessed July 1, 2014.
essarily navigating every trend in information-
8(5):e64841. 10 Peters HP, Dunwoody S, Allgaier J, Lo Y-Y, Brossard D (2014)
sharing from YouTube to Reddit. We believe 2 Liang X, et al. (2014) Building buzz: (Scientists) communicating Public communication of science 2.0: Is the communication of
journalists (working to cover disparate topics science in new media environments. Journalism Mass Commun Q science via the “new media” online a genuine transformation or old
91(4):772–791. wine in new bottles? EMBO Rep 15(7):749–753.
on tight deadlines) would especially benefit 3 Ecklund EH, James SA, Lincoln AE (2012) How academic biologists 11 Suleski J, Ibaraki M (2010) Scientists are talking, but mostly to
from accessible and creditable summaries writ- and physicists view science outreach. PLOS ONE 7(5):e36240. each other: A quantitative analysis of research represented in mass
ten from a broad perspective (6, 12), which 4 Peters HP, et al. (2008) Science communication. Interactions with media. Public Underst Sci 19(1):115–125.
the mass media. Science 321(5886):204–205. 12 Granado A (2011) Slaves to journals, serfs to the web: The use of
could help level the playing field for important 5 Jensen P, Rouquier J-B, Kreimer P, Croissant Y (2008) Scientists the internet in newsgathering among European science journalists.
research currently overlooked by mass media. who engage with society perform better academically. Sci Public Journalism 12(7):794–813.
Policy 35(7):527–541. 13 Peters HP (2013) Gap between science and media revisited:
Furthermore, by relating the significance of the
6 Amend E, Secko DM (2012) In the face of critique: A Scientists as public communicators. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
work in the author’s own words, lay summa- metasynthesis of the experiences of journalists covering health and 110(Suppl 3):14102–14109.
ries are a proactive measure against a common science. Sci Commun 34(2):241–282. 14 Dubé CE, Lapane KL (2014) Lay abstracts and summaries:
7 Brossard D (2013) New media landscapes and the science information Writing advice for scientists. J Cancer Educ 29(3):577–579.
fear of scientists that their work will be mis- consumer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110(Suppl 3):14096–14101. 15 Besley JC, Tanner AH (2011) What science communication
interpreted or misrepresented in the media. 8 Fahy D, Nisbet MC (2011) The science journalist online: Shifting scholars think about training scientists to communicate. Sci Commun
Finally, scientists could embrace lay sum- roles and emerging practices. Journalism 12(7):778–793. 33(2):239–263.
9 Horrigan JB (2006) The Internet as a Resource for News and 16 Kuehne LM, et al. (2014) Practical science communication
maries as a way of taking up the gauntlet of Information Science (Pew Internet & American Life Project, strategies for graduate students. Conserv Biol 28(5):
the social contract and science communication Washington, DC), Available at www.pewinternet.org/2006/11/ 1225–1235.

3586 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1500882112 Kuehne and Olden