A scientific conclusion is only useful if it's communicated clearly and honestly to others. An evidence-based argument uses the actual data collected to support a claim, rather than opinion alone — explaining not just what was found but why the evidence supports that conclusion. Good science communication also considers the audience: a report for other scientists might use technical language and detailed data, while an explanation for the public needs to be clear and accessible without oversimplifying to the point of being misleading. When using someone else's data or research, it's important to cite the source and respect any ethical guidelines around how that information was collected and can be used.
Example
A scientific report on a new vaccine trial might include detailed statistics for other researchers, while a news article explaining the same trial to the public would focus on the key finding — "the vaccine was 90% effective" — in plain language, while still being accurate.
Key terms
Evidence-based argument:
A claim supported directly by data and reasoning, not opinion alone.
Audience:
The specific group of people a piece of communication is written or spoken for.
Cite:
To acknowledge where information or data originally came from.
Questions
1. An evidence-based argument uses:
Opinion alone
Data to support a claim
Guessing
Nothing at all
2. Communicating findings clearly is:
Unimportant in science
An important part of the scientific process
Only for non-scientists
Never necessary
3. The audience of a piece of communication is:
The topic itself
The specific group it's written or spoken for
Always scientists only
Irrelevant
4. Citing a source means:
Copying it without credit
Acknowledging where information came from
Ignoring where data came from
Deleting the source
5. A report for other scientists might use:
No data at all
Technical language and detailed data
Only pictures
Random guesses
6. An explanation for the general public should be:
As confusing as possible
Clear and accessible
Full of unexplained jargon
Deliberately misleading
7. Being honest in science communication is:
Optional
Important
Irrelevant
Only for formal reports
8. Which best supports an evidence-based argument?
'I just think this is true'
'Data collected during the investigation shows a clear pattern supporting this claim'
'Everyone agrees, so it must be true'
'I read it somewhere once'
9. A news article explaining a study "in plain language" for the public should still be:
Inaccurate, if it makes things simpler
Accurate, even while being simplified
Full of technical jargon
Completely different from the actual findings
10. Why might a scientist adjust their language depending on the audience?
To trick different audiences
To communicate the same underlying findings effectively to different readers
Audience never matters in science
To hide the real findings from some groups
11. Citing sources when using someone else's data mainly shows:
Disrespect for the researcher
Respect for where the information came from and academic honesty
That the data is fake
Nothing important
12. Which is closest to good science communication practice?
Oversimplifying to the point of being misleading
Being clear and accurate without misleading the audience
Using only complex jargon regardless of audience
Avoiding all explanation
13. A well-communicated scientific finding typically includes:
What was found and why the evidence supports it
Only the final answer with no explanation
Random unrelated facts
Nothing about the evidence
14. Ethical guidelines around using someone else's data might include:
Ignoring where it came from
Getting appropriate permission and giving proper credit
Changing the data without saying so
Claiming it as your own
15. A journalist reports "Scientists PROVE coffee cures all diseases" based on a study with only a small, uncertain correlation. What is the main problem?
It accurately reflects the study's findings
It overstates the certainty and scope of the actual evidence, misleading the audience
It uses too much technical language
It cites its sources correctly
16. Why is it considered poor practice to present preliminary or uncertain findings as if they were definitely proven facts?
Uncertainty should always be exaggerated instead
Misrepresenting confidence levels can mislead readers into false certainty about conclusions
Preliminary findings should never be shared at all
There's no difference between preliminary and confirmed findings
17. A student writes a report using a graph and data from someone else's published study without any citation. This is a violation of:
Correct formatting only
Academic honesty and ethical use of others' work
Nothing important
Grammar rules only
18. Which explanation would be most appropriate for a general public audience learning about a new scientific discovery?
A dense paper full of statistical jargon with no context
A clear explanation of what was found and why it matters, using accessible language
A single technical number with no explanation
Nothing, since the public doesn't need to know
19. Why does constructing an evidence-based argument (rather than simply stating an opinion) strengthen a scientific communication?
Opinions are always more convincing than evidence
It shows the conclusion is grounded in verifiable data and reasoning others can check
Evidence-based arguments are harder to understand
It removes the need for any explanation
20. The main purpose of communicating scientific findings effectively is to:
Confuse both scientists and the public equally
Ensure findings are understood accurately and can inform further research, decisions or public understanding
Hide scientific progress from outsiders
Make findings sound more impressive than they are
Answer key (parent copy)
1. Data to support a claim
2. An important part of the scientific process
3. The specific group it's written or spoken for
4. Acknowledging where information came from
5. Technical language and detailed data
6. Clear and accessible
7. Important
8. 'Data collected during the investigation shows a clear pattern supporting this claim'
9. Accurate, even while being simplified
10. To communicate the same underlying findings effectively to different readers
11. Respect for where the information came from and academic honesty
12. Being clear and accurate without misleading the audience
13. What was found and why the evidence supports it
14. Getting appropriate permission and giving proper credit
15. It overstates the certainty and scope of the actual evidence, misleading the audience
16. Misrepresenting confidence levels can mislead readers into false certainty about conclusions
17. Academic honesty and ethical use of others' work
18. A clear explanation of what was found and why it matters, using accessible language
19. It shows the conclusion is grounded in verifiable data and reasoning others can check
20. Ensure findings are understood accurately and can inform further research, decisions or public understanding