Public Speaking to Get New Perspective on Your Research

Professional specialisation, particularly in science, inevitably leads to a situation where only a few people work on closely related topics. Of course, there is always an overlap within related scientific fields, but exchanges with researchers from the very same field are vital, because only they grasp what the challenges really are, what might be a good idea to try and what is unlikely to work. Therefore, it is important to attend conferences to connect with the global research community in one’s specific area. Suddenly, there are now a few dozen Soft Robotics experts to exchange ideas with. Pre-pandemic times afforded me the luxury of attending conferences in person, but currently online talk series such as the Autonomy Talks facilitate interactions with fellow researchers.

Despite the countless benefits of an active exchange within our own research community, there is one consequence that is difficult to avoid: We get used to a certain way of thinking; technical language that is commonly used; certain assumptions that are made and, concepts which are not questioned. One could argue that this effect is rather beneficial since it facilitates an efficient communication because we all share the same contextual knowledge. This is undeniably true when working on problems jointly as a research community and not as a one-man show. However, it might also limit our perspective to a few popular paths being followed by most researchers. Therefore, the simple yet powerful technique of taking a step back and reflecting on your work from a different angle is particularly important as a researcher.

Such an opportunity presented itself to me when I was approached to give a talk at TEDxZurich last November, and present our prototype of an inflatable, human-friendly robot arm. When starting to prepare my talk, I was unaware of the potential self-reflection that would come with it. The chance to present our vision of a robot arm, safe for human use, to a broad audience of non-experts not only required me to leave the bubble of the scientific community, but also to explain ideas in a simple way using everyday language. Every idea or concept needs to be boiled down to its essence. Once we forget about all the details that we tend to get lost in, or the chronology of our progress, that makes no sense in retrospect, we can refocus our view of the original research question we set out to answer.

The audience reaction might also give us an idea of how the results are perceived by people not working on these problems everyday. When chatting to people after the talk, many were excited to see an inflatable robot arm with the ability to catch a ball thrown by a human. Other people familiar with cameras, were interested to see what we use cameras for. However, the benefits that inflatable systems bring along in terms of safety, were not so obvious to the non-experts. But then again, how many people have been injured by a robot in the past? Nevertheless, the awareness of this topic needs to be promoted before the perception of robots changes for the worse. I was delighted to see that people are generally very positive about robots and even came up with their own ideas of how they could support us in daily life.
 

Of course, giving a public speech cannot and should not replace the crucial exchange within the scientific community. However, the interactions with non-experts should also not be underestimated. Their questions might trigger more than we expect.