Welcome, everyone. I am so excited to be able to moderate this panel.
I have worked personally with many of the panelists,
and I’m really looking forward to their presentations.
We’re going to start with Lorna. All the presenters asked that
I just present their first name. And I have worked with Lorna.
I worked with her when I was the chief of operations for the USGS
in Puerto Rico in January 2020. And I cannot – this webinar is not long
enough for me to say enough things – nice enough about Lorna.
She is so fantastic to work with. Lorna has a Ph.D. in geology from
the University of Colorado-Boulder. And she’s currently the research
assistant dean at the Office of the Dean of Graduate Studies
in Research at University of Puerto Rico.
And Lorna has worked with the University of Puerto Rico since 2004
as a professor of the Department of Physical Sciences, College of General
Studies, and currently develops interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary
research in geology and the impacts of geological processes on society.
Lorna has also published books on the 1918 earthquake in Puerto Rico,
among other fantastic publications regarding the seismicity of Puerto Rico.
So, without further biographical information, I’m going to hand it over
to my wonderful colleague Lorna.
Thank you so much for being here today, Lorna.
Lorna, you’re on mute.
- Thank you. Thank you for the invitation. I’m going to share my screen now
so you can see …
… my presentation. Let me just use the full screen.
[silence]
So my name is Lorna Jaramillo-Nieves. I’m a professor from the Physical
Science department at the College of General Studies.
Today I present – I’ll be presenting the talk, Assisting the Puerto Rico
Seismic Network as a Science Communicator During the
January 7, 2020, South of Indios Earthquake in Puerto Rico.
The role that I had as a communicator during this time is based on skills
that I evenly acquire through my teaching in the Department of Physical
Science with focus on how science construct knowledge and the
development of scientific theories. So this talk is an approach of talking
about science using a more interdisciplinary approach.
So, during this time, my main task as the science communicator was to
support the general public decision- making process and also trying to
know in advance which were people’s questions and concerns.
In order to do this, I have to be on top of things in terms of news,
topics that were discussed in the – in the social media, radio programs –
it took a lot of energy. But it is important to have this approach
in order to do the role effectively. It’s important also to mention that
this earthquake is the stronger earthquake that the current generations
in Puerto Rico have experienced. So the concern and the panic
that was in the island was significant during this time.
Now, there are several tips and suggestions that I can mention
in order to do science communication during a period of emergency.
It’s important to conceptualize a plan. Think what is the message in advance
and organize how to present it. Priority, clarity, conciseness,
and significance is also important. Remember there are frequently
time constraints and questions about later events.
Also simple language – use simple language and easy to understand.
It’s very frequent that scientists dismiss as a very complex subject,
so people tend to tune out once they start to hear very complex terms.
And finally – and this is the main challenge as a science communicator –
is to adapt a data-based message for the general public but maintaining
the same depth intended for peers. This is really important.
So, when I was working in this – or, helping in this role during the
emergency, I realized that people had pretty much the same questions.
Should I evacuate my home? Is this going to continue?
Why is this happening? Did scientists know about this?
It’s important to answer all those questions, but also try to keep a balance
between answering the general public questions but also explaining
the processes on a data-based approach,
which is really important during the time in order to inform well.
So another important aspect is to mention which were the approaches
the I used that had a very positive response with people.
Very important, and this is why I list it as the number one, a calm delivery.
This is something that I didn’t realize I had until people started mentioning,
you know, I want you to be in this interview.
Or, we would like to, you know, have a video made of the information
about the sequence, and we want you to do it because your delivery
is really calm, and I think that will help us.
So I realized this is something extremely important.
Also, as possible, have some sense of hope in the message.
That is important too. And knowing what to expect and what to do.
People want to know what is going to happen next.
And they also would like to know what they should do when that other
stage of the sequence happens. So people were very responsive
to suggestions of describing the process of the seismic sequence and
what to do in each part of this process. And finally, understanding the state
of the science more than the details of the science.
One of the main concerns of the general public is that science cannot predict
earthquake, but we explain – when we explain how this is going to
change through time as science learns more about these processes,
people start to think about this. They start to be more open about
discussing these topics and to listen about what is happening.
Now, when you are in this kind of emergency situation, and this was really
my first experience talking to the general public during an emergency,
even when I had done this before, one of the things that I put as
an objective is not to jump from one topic to the other, but just select
topics that I think were important. And every time I have the opportunity
to talk about each topic, I will either repeat information or I go deeper into
the subject. So these are the five topics that I concentrated.
And, to start, I was asked to give information about the daily seismic
activity, and my approach was to use the same figures and catalogs
from the Puerto Rico Seismic Network and the USGS.
Why? Because, if people were interested or wanted to know more
about the subject, they will go to these two agency’s sites,
and they will see the figures and the maps that I will use on my talk.
It doesn’t make any sense to be using figures that people will only see once.
If you can choose to use figures that are already in the internet, chances that
people will go to the sites that you have made reference to and see the same
figure and just think about what you said in your explanation and your talk,
or in your contribution to the general public will be extremely useful.
So I always highlight each of those two resources as very reliable resources
and describe the process of the seismic sequence just like that – as a process
that have different stages and that it will evolve and change.
So this is a figure I commonly use in my talks.
It is from the report of the USGS. Even when some people might think
it is a little bit complex for the general public, it is extremely useful.
It helped me to talk about the magnitude of the event,
how the magnitude changes through time, and how to explain foreshock,
the main shock, and aftershock.
So, given the proper guidance, people were able to follow this figure.
And I can build on other figures to compare and add other explanations
that are also available over the internet.
So, with the proper guidance, people from different literacy levels and
backgrounds were able to navigate the figure without any problem.
Now, one of the main questions that I realized people were asking
repeatedly was, what is a fault? And, as a geologist, this is a concept
that, for me, now, is easy to grasp, but when I started – of course,
when you are first exposed to the idea, it’s very complex.
So, when talking about the local geologic setting, I concentrated
mainly explaining what is a fault. Magnitude of geologic features.
What is deep time. The concept of tectonic plate margins.
And the frequency of events and prediction.
Now, one of the problems that we had, and we have seen this is very different
events where emergencies are caused by nautral events, is that information
that is incorrect – misconceptions – are spread very quickly,
especially in social media. So, in this sequence, we had the
situation in which people were explaining,
or spreading the explanation, that the seismic sequence was
a result of fracking or drilling of the south coast of Puerto Rico.
This idea came from the interpretation of a USGS report, which was completely
taken out of context. Actually, the report tell us that there is no possibility of oil
or hydrocarbon exploration in that area. In order to overcome this,
several geologists – actually, 28 geologists from the island
wrote a document explaining why that is incorrect.
And it was shared with local shows, social media, radio stations
in order to contribute to correct this idea.
Now, my – probably the largest and more profound project that I have
related to science communication is the publication of the book,
The Earthquake in Puerto Rico, that tells the history of the
1918 earthquake in the island. And I used this book and the history
of it to compare that event to the 2020 seismic sequence.
And it helped me to talk about how Puerto Rico is a seismically active
region, how Puerto Rico had experienced earthquakes in the past,
and it will continue to experience earthquakes in the future, and talk about
how Puerto Rico has history of events of very high magnitudes.
The other topic that I developed during this period was built on my
previous work with communities. It was concentrated in safety
and resilience. In this topic, I pretty much work on family and workplace
emergency plans, the importance of seismic awareness and drills,
the emergency bag and a floor plan so people could know how to react
during an event of emergency, and also the knowledge of places
that we visit frequently and which are the hazards in those areas.
So the lessons learned in this period is that there’s – it’s really important
to communicate science in simple words but also maintaining that
depth in the explanation that is intended for peers.
This is complex, but it can be achieved through time.
It’s really important to understand the origin of science misconceptions.
One example that every Puerto Rican in the field of geology have heard about
in the island that is a misconception, people usually ask, is there a volcano
underneath Puerto Rico? And the reason of that knowledge
that have been transmitted orally through generations is because there
was a time during the 1918 earthquake that that idea was published in
one of the local newspapers. And people used the newspaper
as their source of information. So, you know, people know
more than they think they know. It’s also important to recognize
the local knowledge. Try to really understand why people
think the way they think in order to correct misconceptions.
And the last thing I learned is the acknowledgement of how much
energy is required to be a science communicator
during a period of emergency.
So I will gladly answer any questions you might have.
I will stop sharing my screen so I can give opportunity for questions.
- Thank you so much, Lorna.