The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Challenges and Opportunities in Communicating About Research Activities Involving Animals
Pages 18-21

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 18... ... To explore opportunities to address these challenges and communicate effectively about a variety of pertinent issues, speakers drew upon their own experiences along with scientific developments, case studies, and scholarly literature on topics such as ethics and science communication to share insights and suggestions for action to advance meaningful public dialogue. EFFECTIVELY ADDRESSING INADEQUATELY COMMUNICATED TOPICS Allyson Bennett, University of Wisconsin -- Madison, discussed ways in which the public engages with scientific information and opportunities for scientists to better meet the public's needs through effective communication. Read the entire page →
From page 19... ... For research with humans, modern bioethics takes a decidedly nonconsequentialist view, he said, holding that some practices, such as conducting studies without informed consent, are not acceptable no matter what the potential outcomes are. Shriver noted that it is likely rare for any individual to take a purely consequentialist or nonconsequentialist approach, with many people combining them, such as concluding that some activities are absolutely unacceptable regardless of the potential benefits but others may be acceptable if the potential benefits are great enough. Read the entire page →
From page 20... ... COMMUNICATING ABOUT NAMS Lisa Hara Levin, Coridea, discussed opportunities to improve public understanding and dialogue around animal models by advancing research and communication about "NAMs," an acronym that has been defined as "nonanimal models," "new alternative methodologies," "new approach methods," and various other terms that describe novel methods that, once proven effective, granted regulatory approval, and implemented, could reduce or replace the need for animals in research. In this workshop, the acronym included all of these definitions. Read the entire page →
From page 21... ... France suggested that scientists can be successful by posting more positive than negative content, using images that present research positively, and keeping posts short. Recognizing that not all social media interactions are going to be positive, France suggested that scientists or institutions that have been targeted by activists can still productively use social media to highlight positive research with animals' stories and do not necessarily benefit from silencing themselves for fear of inevitable negative comments. Read the entire page →

From page 18...

... To explore opportunities to address these challenges and communicate effectively about a variety of pertinent issues, speakers drew upon their own experiences along with scientific developments, case studies, and scholarly literature on topics such as ethics and science communication to share insights and suggestions for action to advance meaningful public dialogue. EFFECTIVELY ADDRESSING INADEQUATELY COMMUNICATED TOPICS Allyson Bennett, University of Wisconsin -- Madison, discussed ways in which the public engages with scientific information and opportunities for scientists to better meet the public's needs through effective communication.

Read the entire page →

From page 19...

... For research with humans, modern bioethics takes a decidedly nonconsequentialist view, he said, holding that some practices, such as conducting studies without informed consent, are not acceptable no matter what the potential outcomes are. Shriver noted that it is likely rare for any individual to take a purely consequentialist or nonconsequentialist approach, with many people combining them, such as concluding that some activities are absolutely unacceptable regardless of the potential benefits but others may be acceptable if the potential benefits are great enough.

Read the entire page →

From page 20...

... COMMUNICATING ABOUT NAMS Lisa Hara Levin, Coridea, discussed opportunities to improve public understanding and dialogue around animal models by advancing research and communication about "NAMs," an acronym that has been defined as "nonanimal models," "new alternative methodologies," "new approach methods," and various other terms that describe novel methods that, once proven effective, granted regulatory approval, and implemented, could reduce or replace the need for animals in research. In this workshop, the acronym included all of these definitions.

Read the entire page →

From page 21...

... France suggested that scientists can be successful by posting more positive than negative content, using images that present research positively, and keeping posts short. Recognizing that not all social media interactions are going to be positive, France suggested that scientists or institutions that have been targeted by activists can still productively use social media to highlight positive research with animals' stories and do not necessarily benefit from silencing themselves for fear of inevitable negative comments.

Read the entire page →

← Previous Chapter Skim

Next Chapter Skim →

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.

Challenges and Opportunities in Communicating About Research Activities Involving Animals Pages 18-21

Challenges and Opportunities in Communicating About Research Activities Involving Animals
Pages 18-21