Branding

Visual identity is a tool for expressing branding, but it is not, in itself, branding.

Indeed, advice we get on branding often equates the two items together.

Branding goes hand-in-hand with visual identity. What is branding and why should we consider that in the context of STEM

(Markers of) Gravitas

Gravitas belong to the ancient Roman virtues.

The modern Virtues

Signalling reliability

Reputation

The expression “your reputation precedes you” is ambiguous, which also makes it enticing, open to interpretation. On a personal level, we craft, either actively or passively, our reputation.

Signs of competence

Signs of intelligence

Area Signal
Language Using the appropriate jargon terms.

This is closely related to the ability to blend into different situations, which we’ll explore next.

Generative AI

We can see transparently how society recognizes “scientific” material by using tools like chatGPT:

Given the prompt: “Help me make text sound more scientific” the following output is provided:

Certainly! Here's a before-and-after example of how you might enhance the scientific tone of a piece of text:

Original text: 
"The experiment showed that plants grow better with added fertilizer."

Enhanced scientific tone:
"The experimental findings elucidate a pronounced augmentation in vegetative growth as a consequence of the application of supplementary fertilization." 

In the enhanced version, I employed more formal language, utilized scientific terminology ("experimental findings," "augmentation in vegetative growth," "supplementary fertilization"), and structured the sentence in a more complex manner to convey a sense of scientific rigor and precision.

According to chatGPT, the enhanced version conveys a sense of scientific rigor and precision because it contains the following:

  • More formal language
  • Scientific terminology, such as
    • “experimental findings”
    • “augmentation in vegetative growth”
    • “supplementary fertilization”
  • Sentences are structured in a more complex manner

On the left is text from the original article and on the right is a modified version from chatGPT:

Fat is an essential part of our diet – in fact, it’s recommend that around 20 - 30% of all the calories we consume daily should come from fat. A good balance of fats helps keep our cells in good working order, which in turn means our bodies function as they should.

Yet as most of us are aware, eating too much fat can lead to health problems like weight gain and heart disease; especially if we eat too much of the wrong kind of fat, such as the omega 6 fats found in a lot of processed foods.

However, new research being done in Liverpool is revealing that too much unhealthy fat could be affecting our health in other ways we’re only just beginning to realise.

Surprisingly, it seems that it can affect our body’s ability to control our blood sugar levels. This is bad because an inability to control our blood glucose can lead to type 2 diabetes.

What’s more, sugar comes in lots of different forms – it’s not just a spoonful in a cup of tea or a chocolate bar – every time we eat a carbohydrate like bread or pasta, our body breaks it down into sugars.

The research suggests that if we regularly eat a lot of fat and carbs in a day, we could be doing lasting damage; but the scientists are also finding that men and women respond differently.

Fat constitutes an indispensable component of our dietary intake, with recommendations stipulating that approximately 20 - 30% of daily caloric consumption should derive from fat sources. Maintaining a harmonious balance of fats is imperative for the preservation of cellular integrity, thereby ensuring optimal physiological functionality.

Nevertheless, excessive fat consumption, particularly of the deleterious variety such as omega-6 fats prevalent in processed foods, is widely acknowledged to precipitate adverse health outcomes, including obesity and cardiovascular ailments.

Emergent investigations conducted in Liverpool are illuminating previously unexplored facets of the deleterious impact of excessive unhealthy fat intake on overall health. Surprisingly, burgeoning evidence suggests that it impairs the body’s regulatory mechanisms governing blood glucose levels, thereby exacerbating the risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

Furthermore, it is imperative to acknowledge the manifold forms in which sugars manifest in our diets, extending beyond overt sources like refined sugars to encompass carbohydrates ubiquitous in staple foods such as bread and pasta. These carbohydrates are metabolized into sugars upon digestion, contributing to the overall glycemic load.

Pertinently, the research posits that sustained consumption of high-fat and high-carbohydrate diets may elicit enduring physiological repercussions. Significantly, gender-specific disparities in metabolic responses are also emerging as a focal point of investigation within this burgeoning field of inquiry.

Another Example

Original Revision
MAY 20th will mark the end of “mental-health awareness week”, a campaign run by the Mental Health Foundation, a British charity. Roughly a quarter of British adults have been diagnosed at some point with a psychiatric disorder, costing the economy an estimated 4.5% of GDP per year. Such illnesses have many causes, but a growing body of research demonstrates that in young people they are linked with heavy consumption of social media. On May 20th, the culmination of “mental-health awareness week” will mark the conclusion of a concerted effort led by the Mental Health Foundation, a venerable British charity. A staggering quarter of British adults have been diagnosed with psychiatric disorders at various points, with resultant costs to the economy estimated at approximately 4.5% of GDP annually. While the etiology of such disorders is multifaceted, an emerging corpus of research underscores a significant association between heavy engagement with social media platforms and mental health issues, particularly among young demographics.
According to a survey in 2017 by the Royal Society for Public Health, Britons aged 14-24 believe that Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and Twitter have detrimental effects on their wellbeing. On average, they reported that these social networks gave them extra scope for self-expression and community-building. But they also said that the platforms exacerbated anxiety and depression, deprived them of sleep, exposed them to bullying and created worries about their body image and “FOMO” (“fear of missing out”). Academic studies have found that these problems tend to be particularly severe among frequent users. A survey conducted in 2017 by the Royal Society for Public Health revealed that individuals aged 14-24 perceive platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and Twitter to have adverse effects on their overall well-being. Despite affording opportunities for self-expression and community integration, respondents expressed heightened levels of anxiety and depression, sleep deprivation, exposure to cyberbullying, and concerns regarding body image and the phenomenon of “FOMO” (fear of missing out). Academic inquiries corroborate these findings, indicating a disproportionate prevalence of these maladies among frequent users.
Sean Parker, Facebook’s founding president, has admitted that the product works by “exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology”. Indeed, an experiment by five neuroscientists in 2014 concluded that Facebook triggers the same impulsive part of the brain as gambling and substance abuse. Yet it is difficult to prove that obsessing over likes and comments causes mental illness, rather than the other way around. The most convincing effort was a survey that tracked a group of 5,208 Americans between 2013 and 2015. It found that an increase in Facebook activity was associated with a future decrease in reported mental health. Sean Parker, the founding president of Facebook, candidly acknowledged the platform’s exploitation of inherent vulnerabilities in human psychology. Indeed, a seminal experiment conducted by neuroscientists in 2014 discerned parallels between Facebook engagement and the activation of impulsive neural pathways akin to those observed in gambling and substance abuse. However, establishing a causal relationship between social media engagement and mental illness remains a formidable challenge. Notwithstanding, a compelling longitudinal survey tracking 5,208 Americans from 2013 to 2015 revealed a noteworthy association between increased Facebook activity and subsequent declines in reported mental well-being.
An obvious solution to the problem is to cut down on screen time. Even the most obsessive users should be able to do so. The neuroscientific study on Facebook found that the subjects’ cognitive ability to inhibit their impulsive behaviour was less impaired than for drug or gambling addicts. And data from Moment, an activity-tracking app, show that it is possible for light social-media consumers to be content. Each week it asks its 1m users whether they are happy or sad with the amount of time they have spent on various platforms. Nearly 63% of Instagram users report being miserable, a higher share than for any other social network. They spend an average of nearly an hour per day on the app. The 37% who are happy spend on average just over half as long. One potential remedy for this burgeoning issue lies in curtailing screen time, an adjustment feasible even for the most ardent users. Neuroscientific investigations into Facebook usage revealed that subjects exhibited relatively preserved cognitive inhibitory capacities compared to individuals grappling with substance or gambling addictions. Insights gleaned from Moment, an activity-tracking application boasting a user base of one million, suggest that moderation in social media consumption correlates with heightened contentment. Notably, nearly 63% of Instagram users reported feelings of misery, with the average daily usage exceeding an hour. Conversely, the 37% reporting happiness spent approximately half the time on the platform.
The happiness rate is much higher for FaceTime (91%), a video-calling app, and phone calls (84%). When it comes to social networking, actual conversations are hard to beat. Moreover, the pursuit of happiness appears more attainable through mediums facilitating direct interpersonal communication. Video-calling applications such as FaceTime boasted a remarkable happiness rate of 91%, while traditional phone calls garnered an 84% approval rating. Thus, when juxtaposed with virtual interactions, the efficacy of genuine social engagement in fostering emotional well-being emerges as unequivocal.
Table 1: Comparison