1 / 22

Communication in Science 1 August 2005 Conference Posters

Communication in Science 1 August 2005 Conference Posters. David Williams 3C29. Resources. Poster examples in Building 3 corridors Shareware to create posters on your PC http:/www.postersw.com How-to web sites

duy
Download Presentation

Communication in Science 1 August 2005 Conference Posters

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Communication in Science 1 August 2005Conference Posters David Williams 3C29

  2. Resources • Poster examples in Building 3 corridors • Shareware to create posters on your PC • http:/www.postersw.com • How-to web sites • The Poster Site – all is revealed, extensive FAQ http://edu.medsci.uu.se/occmed/poster/default.htm • An online tutorial at Kansas University http://www.kumc.edu/SAH/OTEd/jradel/effective.html Communication in Science - David Williams

  3. The science communication wheel Communication in Science - David Williams

  4. Key decisions in all communication “A poster should not be a standard paper in pictures or, worse still, in words. Keep the text to a minimum, but be sure that your poster tells a good research story.” Communication in Science - David Williams

  5. Why posters? • complement spoken conference papers • dedicated poster session times • but NO captive audience! • more opportunity for discussion • can present preliminary or even planned work • author must be present and selling to get the value Communication in Science - David Williams

  6. The audience: is confronted with large number of posters is standing up & can linger must find posters of most interest wants to ask questions Therefore the poster: title readable from 5 m body easily read from 1-1.5 metres visually attractive minimal text obvious and involved owner The poster session audience Communication in Science - David Williams

  7. Preparation involves • decide the who, why and how • review your research • write 250 words • design layout • prepare photos and graphs • prepare supplementary handout • assemble components or send to print Communication in Science - David Williams

  8. The visual imperative • Reader looks first for heading and conclusion before deciding to continue • hopefully reading, not walking! Communication in Science - David Williams

  9. Title 1. conclusion 3. result 2. method 4. future work The poster layout • size is a given, ca. 1 x 1-1.5 m • use landscape, if allowed • proportions: 30% text30% graphics 40% space • use columns • number headings Communication in Science - David Williams

  10. title, state conclusion authors and affiliations poster number, if assigned Title 1. conclusion 3. result 2. method 4. future work Poster details – title elements Communication in Science - David Williams

  11. Title format • bold san serif font such as Arial Bold or Arial Rounded MT Bold • 25-40 mm high = 72-96 point font • all in capitals if short, otherwise sentence or title case 1 pt = 1/72” or 0.35 mm The title should be Communication in Science - David Williams

  12. The title should be concise THE TITLE SHOULD BE CONCISE The Title Should Be Concise The title should be concise THE TITLE SHOULD BE CONCISE The title should be concise The title should be concise Communication in Science - David Williams

  13. #21 The title should be concise and grippingNed Carter & Kenneth NilssonUniversity Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden Communication in Science - David Williams

  14. #21 Effects of biological control agents on bridal creeper (Asparagus asparagoides)are additivePeter Turner, David Williams: University of CanberraLouise Morin, Darren Kriticos: CSIRO Entomology Communication in Science - David Williams

  15. text figures incl. photos, maps tables Title 1. conclusion 3. result 2. method 4. future work Poster details – body elements Communication in Science - David Williams

  16. Text structure • Use the active voice • Font size 10 mm (36 pt) on line spacing exactly 42 pt • Fonts: sans serif fonts such as Arial or Helvetica • Paragraphs: maximum of 45 characters per line and no more than 4-6 lines per paragraph. • Use flush left paragraphs! • Add minimal emphasis with bold, italics, bullets, arrows • Limit to 250 words of text • Shun verbosity: .. see Figure ..etc. • No citations nor references Communication in Science - David Williams

  17. 2. METHODS A three month glasshouse experiment was conducted during the period June to August 2003 at Black Mountain ACT. This was used to analyse the relative growth rates (RGR) of bridal creeper. Plants approximately 100 days old were exposed to one of four treatments:- • Control • Zygina adults, 1 male and 4 females • Rust inoculations with a suspension of fresh spores in water (0.25 mg/ml), fortnightly • Both agents together, Zygina and rust. Four destructive harvests were undertaken monthly. Fifteen plants were harvested at the commencement of treatments and then 10 plants per treatment at each of the following three harvests, 135 plants in total. Zygina choice and rust performance tests were also carried out as well as a pesticide exclusion experiment. The pesticide exclusion experiment was undertaken near Bar Beach, Narooma NSW (36020’S, 150013’E) from 19/6/03 to 29/9/03. Both agents have been established at this site, with Zygina being released in 1999 and the rust in 2000. Agents were excluded from attacking potted plants placed in the field with either an insecticide, fungicide or both. Communication in Science - David Williams

  18. 2. METHODS We ran a 3-month glasshouse experiment to determine the relative growth rates of bridal creeper seedlings exposed to four treatments:- • Control: water spray only • Zyginaadults: 1 male and 4 females • Rust inoculations: an aqueous suspension of fresh spores (0.25 mg/ml) applied fortnightly • Both agents: Zygina and rust applied. From four harvests taken at monthly intervals we established the above- and belowground growth rates, particularly for the number and mass of the tubers. Communication in Science - David Williams

  19. Graphic elements • Every figure/photo captioned, not numbered • Avoid tables • Delete all but essential information • Label data lines in graphs directly to eliminate legends • Lines should be thicker than for printed papers • Use colours to distinguish different data groups, avoid patterns or open bars • Use colour borders to link related data • Graphical whizbangs are not CONTENT Communication in Science - David Williams

  20. access port Caged bridal creeper plant After 3 months the mean tuber mass was significantly different across all treatments Figure 1. Photo of a caged bridal creeper plant taken at the start of the experiment. Figure 2. Average dry weight of tubers in plants exposed to the four treatments over three months in a glasshouse. Communication in Science - David Williams

  21. Title 1. conclusion 3. result 2. method 4. future work Footer elements • Acknowledgements • Supporters’ logos • Your business card with mugshot • A 1-page handout • add your contact details, abstract, references etc. Communication in Science - David Williams

  22. In summary • posters are advertisements not reports • focus on one central question • plan the overall layout and style • correctly use each visual element • always remember • there is too much text • the kiss principle • you’re the seller Communication in Science - David Williams

More Related