The Evidence Chamber: Playful Science Communication and Research Through Digital Storytelling

Heather Doran,Joe Mcalister,Dan Barnard,Lucina Hackman,Niamh Nic Daeid,Rachel Briscoe

doi:10.3389/fcomm.2021.786891

Abstract

In a courtroom, it is essential that the scientific evidence is both understandable and understood, so that the strengths and limitations of that evidence, within the context of a legal case, can inform decision making. The Evidence Chamber brings together entertainment, public engagement with science and research into a public performance activity that is centred around digital storytelling and science communication. This experience engages public audiences with science and allows a better understanding of how people interpret scientific evidence. In this paper, we discuss how we created this experience as an in-person and fully virtual performance through successful collaboration between forensic science research, public audiences, public engagement professionals, the legal profession, and digital performance artists.

Highlights

Devonshire and Hathway note, “the concept of public engagement (PE) in science has evolved steadily over the last 30 years
In The Evidence Chamber the audience is presented with two different types of scientific evidence, Gait and DNA through the medium of expert witness testimonies, they are given informative scientific comics based on written primers that were produced for the judiciary
Within the context of the experience this presented several challenges; i) the running length of the performance, a case presented in a court of law can take several days or weeks depending on the complexity of the evidence ii) in a courtroom, expert witnesses respond to questions posed by the legal participants

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Devonshire and Hathway note, “the concept of public engagement (PE) in science has evolved steadily over the last 30 years. In The Evidence Chamber the audience is presented with two different types of scientific evidence, Gait and DNA through the medium of expert witness testimonies, they are given informative scientific comics based on written primers that were produced for the judiciary Following this evidence gathering and jury deliberation process they meet with a forensic expert and ask open questions in a debrief. The online version of the experience was tested with members of the public through the LRCFS “Citizens” “Jury”, a group of lay members who contribute to the work of the research centre In this test the software was assessed along with the flow of discussion and ability of the jury members to interact with each other in this virtual setting.

DISCUSSION

ETHICS STATEMENT