1 of 56

Andre Daniel Paredes, Ph.D.

Scientific Presentations

Created: August 03, 2021

Updated: TBD

Credit: Quaker Valley School

Credit: Martin David

2 of 56

Recap – Research Organization Tools and Tips

Tenured Research Professors, impressed their department with their research plan (5 -10 years)

They have developed a narrative that gets funding and with rigorous methodologies.

Start with Literature Reviews to understand a research niche

Significance and Impact, outcome measures, methods and models, relationships between concepts, further considerations, jargon and language in the niche.

3. Create diagrams/ concept maps to identify what you need to know to inform your research

4. To search and find reputable peer-reviewed scientific articles is to apply systematic review methodology

3 of 56

Presentation Tips

Aim (audience, intent, message)
Connect and pull before getting technical with message
Clunking and rule of 3
Make data more relatable

Communication is building a reputation

4 elements of Reputation

Expertise, empathy, commitment, and transparency

Warm authenticity builds trust
Be conscientious of your audience

4 of 56

Questions from the Community

Are there any tips/tricks out there on how to engage an audience during an online presentation? If cameras are off, hard to know if silence means that what I'm saying is being understood or creating confusion.

I would like to learn more about how to keep an audience engaged during a virtual presentation. Especially since body movement and stage presence are such big contributors to how the presentation is perceived by the audience.

I would like to learn more about the details regarding the three stylistic differences for research presentation as detailed on slide 22

I am curious as to whether there is a specific color combination that is preferred/ suggested in general. More specifically for clinical science presentations.

5 of 56

Presentation Tips

Remember they are hearing it for the first time
You have to earn the right to bullshit
Best speakers are

clear, execute with a lot of clarity
great transitions
get rapport - you get more with sugar

Compelling Presentations

Convey a story in the first 30 seconds or people lose interest
Use 5 senses with details
Do a positive spin on the story

Lean model yourself from the greats

6 of 56

Why do researchers do scientific presentations?

7 of 56

Without funding, scientists cannot conduct research and even the best ideas cannot be tested

Common Weaknesses

Insufficient “proof of concept”
Lack of a clear timeline with measurable milestones
Overambitious research plans
Incoherent or unfocused designs
Poor write-up and presentation of material overall.

NIH Grants Review Criteria at a Glance

NIH NIAID Sample Grant Applications

8 of 56

To communicate effectively is to craft a narrative

1 minute

10 minute

5 minute

20-60 minute

9 of 56

Good story telling and research presentations are one in the same

Great storytelling is about taking a piece of the human condition and conveying its unique situation

(SIGNIFICANCE and IMPACT)

Great stories have a clear structure and purpose

(SLIDE DESIGN, Goal of study, and IMRD)

Great stories have character

(TECHNICAL NEED and NOVELTY)

Great stories are simple and focused

ALL TOGETHER: COGENCY

10 of 56

10 Quick tips for clarity in research presentation

Prepare transitions – assertion headlines should flow
Each slide should have only 1 central point – all other claims should support central point
Less is more
Remain on a slide for 2 minutes maximum.
36 Arial header – 24 Arial body ; don’t be afraid to bold and italicize and bold
Dedicate 1 slide to Title (spend at least 30-60 seconds)
Dedicate 1 slide to Goal of Study
Dedicate 1 slide to Recapitulate (may include future direction)
Dedicate 1 slide to Acknowledgements
Protect yourself from grammar and typo mistakes with your life.

An excellent research presentations requires a creative process – do not underestimate the workload. (permit time for revisions) �

11 of 56

Ultimately, You must decide what needs to be shown what needs to be said�

Introduction:

You get to craft the narrative and goal

Methods:

You must decide how you’d like to organize and articulate the study design – make clear assumptions

Results & Discussion

You provide objective and proper context to the results.
You provide context to the meaning of the results as well a personal perspective on technical merit and general impact

Study the fringes of science we will learn legitimate science and how to do the best science as possible

It goes beyond a few mistakes, it misses key critical thinking skills. However, it’s a spectrum rather than a clear divide (“demarcation problem”)

Thousdands of papers are being published – if you are dedicated any notion that are in peeer reviewed public literature – but only by looking at bulk can you do that

Rely on anectodal evidence and testimony. Anecodes are uncontrolled - and can be difficult to trust – they are ad hoc. (dead man tell no tales). -- takes critical thinking to listen seriously to stories that other people tell us at least not as fact.

Core principles maybe based on a single case or observation rather than a large body of evidence. -- hasty generalization logicall fallacy.

Subluxation in chiropractory -

Iris of eye reflect – humonculous approach (tiny body is represented in one small piece fo the obdy) – single observation owl – gold flex in iris went away

Broaden implications of owth theory – all this area of mainstain must be wrong because it conflicts with my theory - Everything you think you know is wrong – ancient civilization, --- All claims of science are replaced with another string of though – replacing all of science

Growing Earth – earth is getting larger – contenents were all connected on a small earth – oceans filling in the cracks that filling inbetweee – where is new matter coming from, how are orbits stable what about gravity , well perhaps its magneticism not gravity that holds everything in the earth. - Spontaneous creation of matter from nothing – uknown to physics -- violates conservation matter. -🡪 Good science is careful and conservative does not make claims that exeedes evidence

Peer reviewed - specific thinkg sto decide - Do the conclusions of the research extend from the evidence. Authoer that makes conlcusions that are too bold it must be fixsed before it can be accepted for publication.

While science lead to elegantly simple answers – pseudo science use simple to solve complicated matters “Theory of everything 🡪 exceeed justfication” example cure of all disease. How about cure to cancer.

Science is a harsh mistress– peer review – science is critical of any new theories --- publication is suppose to be a meat grinder 🡪

Criticism is part and parciel fo good science -- claim victim of conspqiracy.

Terms in a in precise or unscientific terms – there is a lot of jargon – is the use of term that have very precise and unambiguous defitions so experts can communicate with eacthoerht in a precise an efficient way; Pseudo science use this to obsfucate to or terms that are vageluy defined

Pseudo science fail to progress – endless trying to prove existence or trying to establish spy or esp eve exists or define how it works or what are its prnciples; sceicne will progress over time

12 of 56

Final Comments

Scientific thinking doesn’t come naturally to humans -critical thinking is learned and developed
Approach your slides with scientific skepticism – cite
Limit slides to a single assertion
Dunning Kruger Effect - understand your skill-sets, strengths, and weakness
You are the host – we the audience are at your mercy - KNOW US
Engage questions with humility, never hostility

ENJOY YOURSELF