Scientists Build Trust Through Culture, Not Just Facts

When a scientist explains biological patterns through the intricate designs of henna art familiar to her community, something magical happens. Science stops being a sterile lecture and becomes a conversation that feels like home.

Over 700 researchers have participated in ReclaimingSTEM workshops since 2018, learning to share science in ways that honor their identities and communities. These scientists, many from backgrounds historically excluded from STEM fields, are proving that the best science communication isn't about dumping information on audiences. It's about building relationships.

The shift matters because who speaks for science determines which problems get solved and who benefits from discoveries. Traditional science communication relies on press releases, public lectures, and one-way information transfers designed to boost scientific literacy. But researchers from marginalized backgrounds face a different reality in STEM spaces, often encountering discrimination, isolation, and pressure to hide parts of themselves.

So they're doing something different. They host bilingual workshops with local families. They create climate change comics with Indigenous youth. They launch podcasts where scientists of color share their journeys into STEM fields.

One researcher connected pattern formation in biology to geometric designs her audience already knew from their cultural traditions. Instead of simplifying jargon, she made science relatable by meeting people where they already were. The approach worked because it acknowledged that audiences bring valuable knowledge to the table.

The research team, themselves from underrepresented communities, studied how identity shapes science communication. They discovered that marginalized scientists naturally adopt more inclusive communication styles. Rather than treat science as neutral and emotionless, they lean into emotion and cultural relevance.

Why This Inspires

This approach does more than make science accessible. It expands who feels they belong in STEM spaces and ensures scientific knowledge serves actual community needs rather than just academic interests.

The workshops encourage participants to explore how their identities intersect with their scientific work through interactive activities and community discussions. Participants reported using audience-centered, identity-focused, and emotion-driven methods that traditional training often overlooks.

The implications reach beyond individual scientists. When science communication becomes relationship-building, it strengthens trust between researchers and communities. It acknowledges that lived experiences shape how science gets conducted and translated into practice.

These scientists are reclaiming STEM by bringing it back to their communities in culturally relevant ways. Their work proves that identity isn't an obstacle to overcome in science communication but an asset that makes science stronger and more trustworthy for everyone.