A thread on designing poster presentations. I love poster design because there are so many good ways to make a poster. But like any presentation, simple design strategies can optimize communication. Compiled by @__Matt_Carter__ . 🧵1/21
The advantage of posters over slide presentations or published papers is that they allow for direct communication with others about a focused project. I actually met both my Ph.D. advisor and postdoc advisor when presenting posters! 🧵2/21
Scientific posters can be designed with multiple layouts and formats, yet all have sections similar to those in a scientific paper. 🧵3/21
Unlike written papers, posters don’t need abstracts (even if you wrote one for the conference program). On posters, abstracts are wordy and take up space, even if written in a smaller font size. 🧵4/21
The best poster titles are declarative conclusions. Because poster titles are the one statement that all passersby will read, they are the ultimate way to communicate your take-home point. 🧵5/21
Highlight your research goal/hypothesis that is the rationale for your project. Consider placing it in its own section or highlighting it at the end of your background section. I actually use a different colored font so it stands out. 🧵6/21
Use results sections to declare major conclusions. Each section should be titled with a declarative conclusion, and then the data within that section should provide evidence for that conclusion. 🧵7/21
Highlight the major conclusions at the end of your poster. I actually use the same colored font used to highlight my goal/hypothesis so the reader visually connects these statements. 🧵8/21
De-emphasize acknowledgements and references. While these sections are important, they are not as visually appealing relative to your actual content. Shrink the font size and place them at the bottom of your poster. 🧵9/21
Try to reduce the amount of text as much as possible. There is an inverse correlation between the amount of text on your poster and the probability that someone will want to read it. 🧵10/21
Choose backgrounds that aren’t distracting. Backgrounds should be just that—backgrounds that don’t overwhelm what is placed in front. 🧵11/21
To help your audience focus on one poster section at a time, visually unite the content within each section its own box or under a visually striking heading. 🧵12/21
Choose fonts that are easy to read. On posters (as well as other media that are read from a distance) sans serif fonts are best. For example, Helvetica, Arial, Calibri, or Myriad Pro. 🧵13/21
To see how large text appears before your poster is printed, it can be helpful to print text with various font sizes on a standard piece of paper. Tape it to a wall and refer to it when making your poster. 🧵14/21
Poster titles (and the titles of individual sections) are easiest to read in “sentence case.” 🧵15/21
Eliminate extraneous visual elements or decorations for maximal clarity. I avoid using distracting color choices, unnecessary numbering of individual sections, and… dare I say it… institutional logos. 🧵16/21
Let your text and figures breathe with plenty of surrounding white space. Rather than making your poster look desolate, the right amount of spacing between items increases their impact. 🧵17/21
At a poster session, display your poster in a way that is professional and aesthetically pleasing. Sloppy poster display can make a great poster look sloppy itself. 🧵18/21
Consider the possibility of providing supplementary information to visitors that are impossible to present on a printed poster. For example, a tablet/computer to show movies or play audio recordings. 🧵19/21
I have traditionally used PowerPoint or Illustrator to make posters—but there are newer, amazing tools to make posters, including BioRender’s new poster making software. 🧵20/21
Would love to hear your own ideas about designing posters. Feel free to also contact me on my personal twitter account, @__Matt_Carter__ . These ideas were selectively taken from Designing Science Presentations. 🧵21/21
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.