Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T04:42:51.639Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Show Don't Tell: Engaging the Public in Language Science through a Participatory Experiment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Sudha Arunachalam,
Nick Bednar,
Lindsay Burns,
María Cobo Nieto and
Laura Wagner
Sudha Arunachalam*
Affiliation:
New York University
Nick Bednar*
Affiliation:
Center of Science and Industry
Lindsay Burns*
Affiliation:
Noelle Scott Research, LLC
María Cobo Nieto*
Affiliation:
New York University
Laura Wagner*
Affiliation:
The Ohio State University
*
Arunachalam, New York University, 665 Broadway, Room 623, New York, NY 10012, [sudha@nyu.edu]
[nbednar@cosi.org]
[hello@noellescott.com]
[mdc9122@nyu.edu]
[wagner.602@osu.edu]
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article describes a novel program of language science engagement, called CogSciDIY: Language Science. This program combines features from citizen science and participatory-action research in an innovative way to promote science understanding. Language science is rarely covered in these domains, so the program provides a unique opportunity for nonlinguists to learn more about the field. Using an interactive online platform, members of the general public assisted a research team in identifying a research question, designing an experiment to test that question, and interpreting the results of the experiment. The program provided guided support for the participants to learn about both language science content and the scientific method more generally. User outcomes in the form of participation analytics and an internal evaluation survey suggest that this program has promise for helping the general public to better understand the scientific dimensions of language study.

Keywords

public engagementcitizen sciencepublic understandingscience educationlinguistics educationlinguistics engagement

Information

Type
Teaching Linguistics
Information
Language , Volume 99 , Issue 1 , March 2023, pp. e1 - e17
Copyright
Copyright © 2023 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Arunachalam, Sudha. 2013. Experimental methods for linguists. Language and Linguistics Compass 7(4). 221–32. DOI: 10.1111/lnc3.12021.10.1111/lnc3.12021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bednar, Nicholas, Arunachalam, Sudha; and Wagner, Laura. 2021. Improving science trust and attitudes through DIY citizen science. Connected Science Learning 3(3). Online: https://www.nsta.org/improving-science-trust-and-attitudes-through-diy-citizen-science.10.1080/24758779.2021.12318691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonney, Rick, Ballard, Heidi, Jordan, Rebecca, McCallie, Ellen, Phillips, Tina, Shirk, Jennifer; and Wilderman, Candie C.. 2009. Public participation in scientific research: Defining the field and assessing its potential for informal science education: A CAISE Inquiry Group report. Washington, DC: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education. Online: https://resources.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/PublicParticipationinScientificResearch.pdf.Google Scholar
Bonney, Rick, Phillips, Tina B., Ballard, Heidi L.; and Enck, Jody W.. 2016. Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science? Public Understanding of Science 25(1). 2–16. DOI: 10.1177/0963662515607406.10.1177/0963662515607406CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Budig, Kirsten, Diez, Julia, Conde, Paloma, Sastre, Marta, Hernán, Mariano; and Franco, Manuel. 2018. Photovoice and empowerment: Evaluating the transformative potential of a participatory action research project. BMC Public Health 18(1):432. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-018-5335-7.10.1186/s12889-018-5335-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chung, Joo, Cannady, Matthew A., Schunn, Christian, Dorph, Rena; and Bathgate, Meghan. 2016. Measures technical brief: Fascination in science, version 3.2, Mar 2016. Learning Activation Lab. Online: http://activationlab.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Fascination-Report-3.2-20160331.pdf.Google Scholar
Dickinson, Janis L., Shirk, Jennifer, Bonter, David, Bonney, Rick, Crain, Rhiannon L., Martin, Jason, Phillips, Tina; and Purcell, Karen. 2012. The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 10(6). 291–97. DOI: 10.1890/110236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glusman, Mariana, Pabalan, Laura; and Weisleder, Adriana. 2021. Pediatrician and parent beliefs and practices about bilingual language development. Pediatrics 147(3_MeetingAbstract):76. DOI: 10.1542/peds.147.3MA1.76a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy, Batsheva, Feldman, Tziporah, Cain, Caroline, Leesman, Lauren; and Hood, Chara. 2020. Defining and navigating ‘action’ in a participatory action research project. Educational Action Research 28(1). 142–53. DOI: 10.1080/09650792.2019.1675524.10.1080/09650792.2019.1675524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horst, Jessica S., and Hout, Michael C.. 2016. The Novel Object and Unusual Name (NOUN) database: A collection of novel images for use in experimental research. Behavior Research Methods 48(4). 1393–1409. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-015-0647-3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lippi-Green, Rosina. 2012. English with an accent: Language, ideology and discrimination in the United States. 2nd edn. London: Routledge. [1st edn. 1997.].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, John, Tan, Poh-Ling, Hoverman, Suzanne; and Baldwin, Claudia. 2012. The value and limitations of participatory action research methodology. Journal of Hydrology 474. 11–21. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.09.008.10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.09.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mervis, Jeffrey. 2017. Data check: U.S. government share of basic research funding falls below 50%. Science.org, March 9, 2017. DOI: 10.1126/science.aal0890.10.1126/science.aal0890.10.1126/science.aal0890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadelson, Louis, Jorcyk, Cheryl, Yang, Dazhi, Smith, Mary Jarratt, Matson, Sam, Cornell, Ken; and Husting, Virginia. 2014. I just don't trust them: The development and validation of an assessment instrument to measure trust in science and scientists. School Science and Mathematics 114(2). 76–86. DOI: 10.1111/ssm.12051.10.1111/ssm.12051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NGSS Lead States. 2013. Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Padilla-Walker, Laura M., Thompson, Ross A., Zamboanga, Byron L.; and Schmersal, Larissa A.. 2005. Extra credit as incentive for voluntary research participation. Teaching of Psychology 32(3). 150–53. DOI: 10.1207/s15328023top3203_2.10.1207/s15328023top3203_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palan, Stefan, and Schitter, Christian. 2018. Prolific.ac—A subject pool for online experiments. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance 17. 22–27. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbef.2017.12.004.10.1016/j.jbef.2017.12.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toomey, Thomas, Richardson, Deborah; and Hammock, Georgina. 2017. Introductory psychology: How student experiences relate to their understanding of psychological science. Teaching of Psychology 44(3). 246–49. DOI: 10.1177/0098628317712749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trueswell, John C., Medina, Tamara Nicol, Hafri, Alon; and Gleitman, Lila R.. 2013. Propose but verify: Fast mapping meets cross-situational word learning. Cognitive Psychology 66(1). 126–56. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.10.001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagner, Laura, Patson, Nikole D.; and Awani, Sumurye. 2022. What does the public think about language science? Language 98(4). e224–e249. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2022.0029.10.1353/lan.2022.0029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, Chen, and Smith, Linda B.. 2007. Rapid word learning under uncertainty via cross-situational statistics. Psychological Science 18(5). 414–20. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01915.x.10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01915.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed