Scientific jargon can be ‘satisfying’ — but misleading

When scientists write for lay audiences, they face a familiar dilemma: should they use technical language that reflects precision and authority, or simpler language that maximizes clarity? In a study published in Nature Human Behaviour, Cruz and Lombrozo1 offer fresh insights into this communication dilemma. The paper shows that jargon has different effects on how readers perceive and understand explanations — and that these differences have consequences for both science consumers and science communicators. Across nine online experiments, the researchers presented nearly 6,700 participants with explanations of scientific phenomena that varied by quality (whether the explanation was circular, meaning that its conclusion was used as part of its premise, or complete) and language (whether the explanation was plain or used jargon). Participants were then asked to rate the text along three key dimensions.