Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be'er Sheva 8410501, Israel.
Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, University of Ulm, 89069 Ulm, Germany.
Viruses. 2021 Jul 13;13(7):1356. doi: 10.3390/v13071356.
Many of the world's most pressing issues, such as the emergence of zoonotic diseases, can only be addressed through interdisciplinary research. However, the findings of interdisciplinary research are susceptible to miscommunication among both professional and non-professional audiences due to differences in training, language, experience, and understanding. Such miscommunication contributes to the misunderstanding of key concepts or processes and hinders the development of effective research agendas and public policy. These misunderstandings can also provoke unnecessary fear in the public and have devastating effects for wildlife conservation. For example, inaccurate communication and subsequent misunderstanding of the potential associations between certain bats and zoonoses has led to persecution of diverse bats worldwide and even government calls to cull them. Here, we identify four types of miscommunication driven by the use of terminology regarding bats and the emergence of zoonotic diseases that we have categorized based on their root causes: (1) incorrect or overly broad use of terms; (2) terms that have unstable usage within a discipline, or different usages among disciplines; (3) terms that are used correctly but spark incorrect inferences about biological processes or significance in the audience; (4) incorrect inference drawn from the evidence presented. We illustrate each type of miscommunication with commonly misused or misinterpreted terms, providing a definition, caveats and common misconceptions, and suggest alternatives as appropriate. While we focus on terms specific to bats and disease ecology, we present a more general framework for addressing miscommunication that can be applied to other topics and disciplines to facilitate more effective research, problem-solving, and public policy.
许多全球紧迫问题,如人畜共患病的出现,只能通过跨学科研究来解决。然而,由于培训、语言、经验和理解的差异,跨学科研究的结果容易在专业和非专业受众之间造成误解。这种误解导致对关键概念或过程的理解错误,并阻碍了有效的研究议程和公共政策的制定。这些误解还可能在公众中引起不必要的恐惧,并对野生动物保护产生破坏性影响。例如,关于蝙蝠和人畜共患病之间潜在关联的不准确沟通和随后的误解,导致了全球范围内对各种蝙蝠的迫害,甚至政府呼吁扑杀它们。在这里,我们确定了四种由蝙蝠术语的使用和人畜共患病的出现所驱动的误解类型,我们根据其根本原因对其进行了分类:(1)术语的不正确或过于宽泛的使用;(2)在一个学科内使用不稳定,或在不同学科之间使用不同;(3)术语使用正确,但在听众中引起对生物过程或意义的不正确推断;(4)从呈现的证据中得出错误的推断。我们用常见的误用或误解的术语来说明每一种类型的误解,提供定义、注意事项和常见误解,并在适当的情况下提供替代术语。虽然我们专注于特定于蝙蝠和疾病生态学的术语,但我们提出了一个更通用的框架来解决误解问题,该框架可应用于其他主题和学科,以促进更有效的研究、问题解决和公共政策制定。