The Sagan Effect

If the title of this post caught your eye and made you curious about reading it, it is a safe bet that you know who Carl Sagan was. It is also entirely possible that Sagan turned you on to the wonders of science. If so, we have that in common.

He is so well-known that I will not say much but the “basics”. Sagan is one of my scientific heroes. Even though I have always loved science, reading his books helped me understand why. He was an outstanding scientist, with more than 500 (!) scientific papers to his name. However, Sagan is best-known as a science “popularizer”. He wrote several books, mostly about astronomy and the relationship of humans with the universe in general, but he also wrote about the evolution of human intelligence in his Pulitzer Prize-Winning book “The Dragons of Eden”. He also wrote the novel “Contact”, which was adapted into a move of the same name. My favorite Sagan’s book, bar none is Broca’s Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science.  In a very real sense, just like you never forget your first “Doctor” (cue in Dr. Who’s music theme) you never forget your first Sagan book.

Without a doubt, Sagan is best known as the host of the hugely popular series “Cosmos”.  At one time, it was estimated that the series was seen by roughly a ninth of the world’s population!**

By most measurements of success, he’d made it. However, he paid a price.

The Sagan effect can be defined in various ways. One of these versions states that the scientific popularity of a scientist with the general public is considered to be inversely proportional to the quantity and quality of that scientist’s scientific work. In other words, the more popular the scientist is, the poorer the productivity and quality of her/his work. This is based on the biased perception of some, but by no means all scientists, that whomever is spending too much time and effort communicating science to the public must not be a very good scientist at all.

Do I have to tell you that I do not agree with that? Some of my thoughts on that are here and here.

Anyway, again, Sagan did pay a price. Many attributed his tenure denial from Harvard University to this perception from fellow faculty and it is well documented that this was an actual factor why he was not chosen to become a member of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) of the USA (the equivalent of the Royal Society of England). The members of these organizations are considered the TOP scientists in their respective fields and countries.

His Harvard tenure denial prompted his move to Cornell University, for which I have a soft spot (;-)… Plainly stated, Harvard’s loss, Cornell’s gain. GO RED!

Ironically, after being denied NAS membership, the NAS itself gave him its highest honor, the Public Welfare Medal for his “distinguished contributions in the application of science to the public welfare”… I’d like to think that the thoughts in Sagan’s head while receiving the award were something like “…why you little ##{^^^€>|{%!?…“, and in fact, if you see the picture of that event, that’s the kind of face that Sagan ha

Now my question to you, dear readers: what do you think, what is your perception? Are scientists called to share their science to laypeople? Are scientists who do it second-rate scientists?

**A remake of “Cosmos” is in the works and will be released in 2014.  The host will be Neil Degrasse Tyson, another scientist with an inclination for science popularization.  I have very high hopes for it!

20130210-112100.jpg
Picture credit: http://www.socwall.com/desktop-wallpaper/15654/be-cool-like-carl-by-sa/

If you want to know more

Davidson K (1999) Carl Sagan: A Life. Wiley.

Ecklund EH et al. (2012) How academic biologists and physicists view science outreach. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e36240.

Poundstone W (1999) Carl Sagan: A Life in the Cosmos. Holt and Company.

Russo G (2010) Outreach: Meet the press. Nature 468: 465–467.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you want to know more of my scientific research you can click here.

Want to see what my blog is about? Go here for some other posts. You can also subscribe to my blog! Just go to the “Home” page, right hand side.

Comment here or send me a message if you have any questions! My email is: orpagan@yahoo.com.

I wrote a popular science book! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>tfb-cover1

For more details about my book, click here for my Amazon.com author page.

For my Facebook page click here.

My Twitter name is @Baldscientist

For the customary disclaimers go to my “About” page.

Advertisements
Categories:

25 Comments

  1. Carl Sagan made science entertaining and accessible. His special touch was that he was able to tune into the questions that the layman has but is too embarrassed to say. (Particularly today, as many get tarred with being conspiracy theorists or nutcases! ) He took on thoughts about UFOs, alien life and time travel and discussed the actual science behind it. He was a scientific mind who also dreamed. In my opinion, this was his appeal. And probably the reason hard scientists excluded him.

  2. My spouse and I absolutely love your blog and
    find the majority of your post’s to be just what I’m
    looking for. Does one offer guest writers to write content
    available for you? I wouldn’t mind writing a post or elaborating on many of the subjects you write about
    here. Again, awesome web site!

  3. This week this very topic was discussed at an NSF sponsored conference for the advancement of informal science learning. I’m happy to say that the culture is changing a bit in astronomy departments. In fact the American Astronomical Society mission statement includes two key statements in support of outreach :
    The Society, through its members, trains, mentors and supports the next generation of astronomers. The Society supports and promotes increased participation of historically underrepresented groups in astronomy.
    The Society assists its members to develop their skills in the fields of education and public outreach at all levels. The Society promotes broad interest in astronomy, which enhances science literacy and leads many to careers in science and engineering.

    In fact, they are investing in communication and outreach training by hosting one or two day communication workshops prior to their DPS and winter AAS meetings. It’s been my pleasure to deliver those workshops for the last two years. NSF funded a proposal called Portal to the Public which is run through science centers to train scientists both in communication and how to develop their own outreach materials. The AAAS and American Chemical Society are also very supportive of their scientists being active in outreach and are providing training for their members.

  4. I think it is vital to be able to communicate science effectively at all levels and I think it is something few people can do well. If we did not have any great scientists who could communicate on this level we would have less people inspired to study science. We’d also risk communication in the media being innacurate or misleading leading to health scares etc…….or do we have this already!

      1. Not everyone can be a public communicator like Neil deGrasse Tyson and Brian Cox, and yet if someone doesn’t want to involve the wilder public, they’re really missing a wonderful aspect of science and how it can shape a better future

  5. I’ve also gotten the impression that the science community tends to think less of scientists who spend “too much” time on science communcation, though I don’t think that’s justified. Having said that, some scientists manage to maintain their reputation as scientists despite their popular work (eg, Stephen Hawking) while others seem to eventually replace the practice of science with its popularization (eg, Richard Dawkins). I think this is an important subject which should get more attention. Science communication is both difficult and important; scientists who venture into the field should be encouraged and rewarded, not penalized.

    1. I couldn’t agree more. You gave the perfect example, Hawking, who has sold millions of popular science books and yet as you well said, kept his scientific reputation intact. Dawkins is another one of my favorite science writers when he writes science. When he strays from science, he goes way off the mark. At any rate science communication is an important and (should be) an essential part of science…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s