Fish on a Bicycle

I will be giving a talk about my research aimed at a general audience for the FIRST TIME EVER in a little less than a week (details here). I’m not sure what to expect. An audience of hundreds or a bunch of empty seats? Salmon conservation folk who ask tough questions, or just generally curious folk? I’m definitely most nervous for the Q&A period. While I know my research like the back of my hand, I’m not quite the expert on salmon in general. I fear I may answer quite a few questions with “I have no idea! BUT you should ask my advisor, the man who wrote the book on salmon, Tom Quinn.” In any case, the more friendly faces there the better, so if I know you, I hope to see you there! And if you could, throw in a simple question that I can knock out of the park :)

To prepare for this talk, I’ve been learning to make scientific research into a story—something that does not come easy to scientists in general. You see, we have a very precise method that we must use when writing about our research:

1. Abstract - all the key information about the research in 7 sentences or less.
2. Introduction - why did we put the time and effort into this research? what do we still need to know in the field?
3. Methods - how did you do it? make sure somebody can reproduce the work exactly.
4. Results - report statistics and figures with no interpretation (just the facts ma’am)
5. Discussion - what do we think all this means? what research is still needed?

This structure is great when one scientist wants to read about another’s work. We know exactly where to find what we are looking for. However, to the non-scientist, this format is BORING. Most people communicate through story. In fact, this is probably the oldest form of communication (after all, what was there to do before facebook, tv, radio, etc than sit around a fire and tell stories?) My challenge has been to take the above format and change it into a story:

1. Setup - who are the main characters? What motivates them?
2. Complicating action - oh no! something happens and the protaganist must change their actions to meet their goal!
3. Development - more things happen, suspense and delay of goal-meeting.
4. Climax - height of tension, the audience questions if the protaganist will achieve their goal
5. Epilogue (optional) - tie up loose ends and make everyone comfortable. OR if you are thinking about a sequel, set up a new complicating action!

Once I realized that this was the format people are most familiar and comfortable with, I was amazed that I had NEVER realized it before (that’s what you get for taking mostly science classes in college!) This format is absolutely everywhere: in every TV show, movie, or youtube video you watch, every book, and even simply when people talk to one another. What’s more, when this format is not used, it actually makes people uncomfortable. When a movie skips one of these steps, or a step takes to long to be reached, you tend to think of the movie as boring, or even bad.

Fortunately my study species happens to be a “charismatic megafauna” so the job of creating an interesting character is almost done for me. All I had to do was add a top hat and monocle (which is where my new blog avatar came from), and poof! an endearing, anthropomorphized protagonist. And thanks to Keynote (the apple version of power point) My clever salmon actually moves across the screen on his migratory journey. Even if you think you don’t give a hoot about salmon, come check it out and I promise I’ll to my best to change your mind.