Workshop 3 — Interpreting Evidence & Responsible Communication

Workshop 3 — Interpreting Evidence & Responsible Communication

Workshop 3 — Interpreting Evidence & Responsible Communication

Calendar September / October 2026 (tbc — possibly week of 5 Oct)
Laptop Online (Zoom) | ⏱ ~120 minutes
Earth Globe Europe-Africa Open to AISS scholars and the wider research community
Link Registration / Zoom link: [To be provided]


Overview

This workshop focuses on how to interpret scientific evidence and communicate research findings responsibly in a fast-moving and uncertain field. It complements the ethics-focused workshops by concentrating on evidence standards, uncertainty, and responsible public communication.
Participants will engage with key challenges at the intersection of science, media, and governance, and develop practical tools to navigate ambiguity, avoid misinterpretation, and communicate responsibly.


Overall Objective

To provide participants with practical frameworks to interpret evidence and communicate scientific findings responsibly, particularly in contexts where scientific understanding is evolving and uncertainty is high.


Learning Outcomes

By the end of the workshop, participants will be able to:
  • Assess the strength and limitations of scientific evidence
  • Distinguish between empirical findings, interpretations, and speculative claims
  • Communicate uncertainty without oversimplification, hype, or false precision
  • Understand how scientific claims interact with public discourse and governance
  • Reflect on the societal implications of presenting emerging research


Format (Draft)

  • Introduction (5 min)Framing the challenge of interpreting and communicating evidence in the field
  • Expert Talks (3 × 20 min = 60 min) (15 min talk + 5 min Q&A each)
  • Evaluating Evidence & Scientific Uncertainty — Eric Schwitzgebel
  • What counts as evidence?
  • Indicators vs. conclusions
  • Common epistemic pitfalls in AI research
  • Responsible Scientific Communication — Melanie Mitchell
  • Communicating limits of understanding
  • Avoiding oversimplification, hype, and false precision
  • Explaining uncertainty to diverse audiences
  • Evidence, Governance & Societal Impact — Henry Shevlin
  • How scientific claims influence policy and governance
  • Responsibility at the science–policy interface
  • Interactive Communication Exercise (25 min)Participants work with real or hypothetical research claims, media headlines, or policy-relevant statements related to AI sentience. Activities may include:
  • Rewriting a scientific claim for different audiences
  • Identifying evidence, interpretation, and hidden assumptions
  • Adding appropriate uncertainty framing
  • Distinguishing evidence from interpretation
  • Moderated Panel Discussion & Q&A (25 min)Discussion based on participant contributions
  • Closing (5 min)


Speakers/Facilitators

  •  Eric Schwitzgebel  – UC Riverside
  •  Melanie Mitchell  – Santa Fe Institute
  •  Henry Shevlin  – University of Cambridge