How comprehensible are scientific experts? A multi-method comparison of linguistic analyses, surveys, and real-time audience responses

dc.contributor.authorTaddicken, Monika
dc.contributor.authorThoms, Claudia
dc.contributor.corporateTaddicken, Monika; Institute for Communication Science, Technische Universitaet Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
dc.contributor.corporateThoms, Claudia; Institute of Communication Science, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany
dc.date.accessioned2025-07-29T12:38:14Z
dc.date.available2025-07-29T12:38:14Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.date.updated2025-06-18T07:52:24Z
dc.description.abstractThe comprehensibility of scientific experts is fundamentally important but presents a challenge for experts and their audiences. The definition and evaluation of comprehensibility are central to developing approaches for improvement. On the one hand, comprehensibility can be indicated by linguistic measures; on the other hand, audience assessments represent comprehensibility perceptions. However, the extent of overlap between these perspectives remains unknown. We conducted two studies to address this gap by analyzing five debates on various scientific topics, each featuring three experts. Our approach involved an integration of computational linguistic analyses, surveys, and real-time response measurements. The findings demonstrate that content and linguistic complexity appear complementary in their relationships with audience ratings for comprehensibility. Interestingly, more complex expert statements corresponded to higher overall debate ratings, hinting at the potential influence of human factors. Therefore, recognizing this influence is critical for improving the communication between experts and laypeople.
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2025.1580377
dc.identifier.urihttps://hohpublica.uni-hohenheim.de/handle/123456789/17770
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rights.licensecc_by
dc.subjectComprehensibility
dc.subjectComputational linguistic analyses
dc.subjectAudience assessments
dc.subjectReal-time response measurement
dc.subjectExpert debates
dc.subject.ddc400
dc.titleHow comprehensible are scientific experts? A multi-method comparison of linguistic analyses, surveys, and real-time audience responses
dc.type.diniArticle
dcterms.bibliographicCitationFrontiers in communication, 10 (2025), 1580377. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2025.1580377. ISSN: 2297-900X
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.articlenumber1580377
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.issn2297-900X
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitleFrontiers in communication
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishernameFrontiers Media S.A.
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublisherplaceLausanne
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pageend
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pagestart
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume10
local.export.bibtex@article{Taddicken2025, doi = {10.3389/fcomm.2025.1580377}, author = {Taddicken, Monika and Thoms, Claudia}, title = {How comprehensible are scientific experts? A multi-method comparison of linguistic analyses, surveys, and real-time audience responses}, journal = {Frontiers in Communication}, year = {2025}, volume = {10}, }
local.title.fullHow comprehensible are scientific experts? A multi-method comparison of linguistic analyses, surveys, and real-time audience responses

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
fcomm-10-1580377.pdf
Size:
811.66 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
7.85 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed to upon submission
Description: