One of the most powerful ways that we make sense of complex documents like this is by PLACEMENT of elements.
We treat things close together as RELATED.
⭕⭕
⭕
We think the first two circles are related because they are close left to right. 2/10
But now...
⭕ ⭕
⭕
We think the two left circles are related because they are close up and down. 3/10
The effect of placing two text blocks close together is VERY strong. 💪 It influences how we think about the order to read things.
In this poster, I'm not sure the cues the poster is sending about reading order are super clear. 4/10
The poster's center has six "blocks" of text and images: three across, two down.
The text in the top CENTER block ⬆ is closest to the text in the top RIGHT block. ↗ Top right block is closest to bottom right. ↘
5/10
But that order leaves out the bottom left ↙ and bottom center ⬇!
The heading ties bottom left ↙ and bottom center ⬇ go together, so maybe I am supposed to zig zag? 6/10
But when I go in and try to make sense of the text, I think I am supposed to read across in ROWS.
We also expect consistency! The rightmost section of the poster, "Why it matters" is a column, which also adds to the "Which way to go" ambiguity. 7/10
When you're in the thick of creating a bog document like this, it's easy to think the logical order of the words will dictate reading order.
But we see the larger context - the "blocks" of text and images - LONG before we ever get to sentences or words. 8/10
Alright, another common misconception I encounter is the gene vs allele/variant mixup. Most often I see it phrased something like "She has the gene for breast cancer."
In this example, I think we all understand what the person means: she has a genetic variant that makes her more predisposed to breast cancer. For a lot of purposes, that's the only information we really need.
But in reality, we all have two copies or alleles of the BRCA2 gene, one from each parent. But some of us have versions of that gene that make us more prone to developing breast cancer.
Alright, time to talk some DNA misconceptions and how we can try and break them down!
First up, myths about dominant and recessive traits.
This one hurts, because I thought a lot of these were true for a while!
Often when learning about genetics, we learn that things like tongue-rolling, attached earlobes, and PTC tasting are pure dominant/recessive traits. They're simple, easy traits to demonstrate in a classroom.
But unfortunately, many of them aren't really true dominant/recessive traits! There's a great website called "Myths of Human Genetics" by John H. McDonald at the University of Delaware that breaks down where many of these myths came from: udel.edu/~mcdonald/myth…
Good morning, all! Today, we're gonna talk about the importance of SciComm in Genetics. Why genetics specifically?
Because that's what my PhD is in, so I'm biased towards it being the coolest science 😂.
BUT ALSO because I strongly believe we're all increasingly asked to make choices that involve genetics in our everyday lives, and I want to equip everyone with the vocabulary to feel comfortable making these choices, from getting a DNA test at the doctor to understanding GMOs.
And while I've believed this for a long time, it was thrown into an incredible spotlight over the past few years, as things like PCR and RNA became household words. Imagine my delight as I saw RNA trending, and then the sadness as I found threads full of misinformation.