The Derogatory Definition of “Dumbing Down”- Hena Patel (Guest-writer)

Welcome back to Limitless, this post is actually the first guest-write on the blog and it's quite fascinating, to say the least. I'll let Harry-Potter-fangirl Hena take it from here!

The Matrix and Wall-E, two beloved films, both fit into, or should fit, into the thriller subgenre. Most science fiction filmgoers who believe that A.I. will never take over appear to believe that it is an intangible issue.

That’s how it usually starts— an unsuspecting public suddenly overridden by robots and dystopia.

Why does this appear on a blog that supports technological advancements? Because, despite the initial goal of technical research to educate the public, there is a lack of transparency and outreach.

Many websites publish brand-new research from university and hospital labs, but how many of them simplify it so that anyone can understand and react to it?

"If you don’t understand, then it’s not for you."

That’s how ignorance starts.

Publishing academic research defeats its entire purpose if it excludes readers who cannot comprehend the technical language used in the papers. It lessens the significance of new discoveries and the number of people considering entering the field.

Why don't individuals interested in R & D begin independently learning the terminology when they are younger?

Well, who gives a toddler "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" as their first book to read? Especially when they would rather play with their toys or watch TV.

It ultimately falls on those already working in the field to find new professionals or at the very least persuade those who aren't interested to change their minds. People are constantly on the go, preferring bullet points to paragraphs, straightforward language to technical jargon, and concentrating on the first thing that catches their attention.

Doesn't the value of a research paper decline if it attempts to inform the public about new discoveries in a manner that is incomprehensible to its intended audience?

In other words, most research papers lack the sophistication that other publications possess to draw in their target audience. It's just poorly written.

To researchers who undoubtedly did not earn a Ph.D. to have their scientific methods written like a PBS.org article, the phrase "dumbing it down" seems insulting. But in the end, it is the writers who treat their audience like subject-matter experts who are to blame for their lack of interest and understanding. Almost everyone can understand the stories tabloids and journals present, which also perform significantly better than research articles.

According to a survey conducted by the University of Michigan in 2016, 51 percent of Americans are interested in science, but only 28 percent understand and follow the issues. According to speculation, the majority of the interest stems from romanticized versions of technology and medical fields in the media, such as how NASA is portrayed in films.

When literacy rates and the number of young adults pursuing doctorate degrees are considered, movies do a far better job of being the primary representation of the science and technology fields—but they aren't the most accurate.

Two of the most fascinating and complex fields available in academia are technology and medicine. The only method available to researchers for accurately portraying the developing industries, however, is selective in its presentation, which results in a lack of interest that is blamed on the audience.

The amount of support would undoubtedly be overwhelming if research journalists could look past the wounded pride caused by simplifying scientific terms and recognize the profound benefits of highlighting these industries in a more cultural light.