If you ever do a google image search for scientists, you’ll see a page of (mostly) men in white lab coats, staring at beakers. We seem to be a boring, homogeneous bunch of folks who like looking at colored water all day. The stereotype of scientists in TV and film has luckily improved some since the 1980s. A 1985 report on scientists on television found the following:
For every “villainous” scientist identified in the data, there were five “virtuous” ones. However, for every bad doctor, 19 were good. For law enforcement, the ratio was 1:40. Furthermore, apart from the ratio of portrayals, the NSF study found that the average viewer would see about 11 doctors in a week compared with just 2 “other scientists” (Gerbner et al., 1985, p. 11). Thus, most scientists were seen as good, but they were seen far less often than other occupations. Gerbner (1987) also noted, “scientists, while on the whole positively presented, have a greater share of troublesome and ambivalent portrayals. They are older and ‘stranger’ than other professionals and are more likely to be foreigners” (p. 111).
Dudo et al. set out to update this report in 2010 and note a few improvements even though scientists make up only 1% of characters on screen.
In sum, scientists appear infrequently in prime-time dramatic programs and are typically White males. There are few female scientists and even fewer scientists among characters of color. Moreover, when scientists have appeared since 2000, they frequently are cast in good or mixed roles rather than as the “evil scientist,” and the few female scientists who do appear are overwhelmingly portrayed as good. Scientists and those in the medical professions show the most similarity in terms of their portrayals as good or bad characters. When we see “bad scientists,” they are more likely to be White males than characters in other demographic subgroups.
Flicker (2003) found that if you narrow the conversation to women scientists in film, you find a small group who can be neatly sorted into six archetypes: The old maid, The male woman, The naive expert, The evil plotter, The daughter/assistant and The lonely heroin. I look forward to my career path toward becoming the best evil plotter that I can be.
The Fermilab conducted an interesting little experiment with visiting seventh graders to see how their perceptions of scientists changed before and after their visit to the labs. I purposefully selected the most amusing.
I’m not so sure that I would call us “normal people”, but thanks Amy. At least I’m not automatically a balding, annoying man now.
Angela thinks that we are simple people with simple clothes, house and personality.
I can’t tell if Ashley is describing scientists or lepers at first.
With these fabulous initial perceptions of scientists, it’s no wonder that we are such popular rock stars. I would love to see more kids put through this little experiment though.
For bonus fun, you can see some awkward pictures of scientists standing with random famous people in a strange effort to promote research. They do look fabulous in the photos, but GQ thinks that for the public to be interested in the scientists and their work, they need to be in the same picture as a celebrity. Martin Robbins gives an amusing commentary of the debacle:
Two scientists disturb a picture of a rap artist.
Here we see a child rapper named Bob posing in front of two scientists; although given the lack of any sort of interaction or acknowledgement of each other, the image could just as easily have been Photoshopped. A caption indicates that he “gives his props to the docs,” which is certainly very generous of the lad. The ‘docs’ in question are so important to GQ that they’re in the background and one of them is out-of-focus, which is probably just as well as he appears to be distracted by something off camera.
In comparison to Bob, the scientists present are clearly under-achieving dullards. The guy on the right, Mehmet Toner, has more than a dozen medical inventions and some two hundred publications to his name, which he churns out while leading probably the finest biomedical research group on the planet. Stephen Baylin, the blurry guy in the background, is one of the top cancer research scientists alive, and his work in epigenetics may lead to treatments for faulty genes in cancer cells that can prevent the disease or halt it in its tracks.
If you really want to see some hip, cool scientists, look no further than the Science Tattoo Emporium. I saw today that there is now even a book out, which I will have to go pick up. What better way to commemorate your life’s work than with permanent artwork in your skin? I currently have three life sciences tattoos and if I even complete this PhD thing, I’m tempted to get another. I think I’ve earned it.
Scientists really are just people.
Weird, wonderful people.
caffeinated lab rat 