Prof. Abhijit Banerjee speaks with Financial Times reporter John Reed about global politics and the increased need for trust in economists. On his book, Poor Economics, Banerjee says, “I think we have always thought that economic ideas were too important to be left out of the public discourse. There is a sense in which we think economics does a disservice to ourselves and the world by wrapping ourselves in this omniscient jargon.”
Using Cortico, a nonprofit collaboration with the MIT Center for Constructive Communication that aims “to facilitate conversations and spot themes across a large number of conversations,” NPR’s Morning Edition began a new project to learn more about communities, big and small, across the United States. “This project yielded hours and hours of taped conversations,” reports NPR. “So we used Cortico's AI tools and a prototype from MIT to search for shared themes across all the recordings so that we could listen more closely.”
Prof. Evelina Fedorenko speaks with Scientific American reporter Gary Stix about her research demonstrating that “language and thought are, in fact, distinct entities that the brain processes separately.” Speaking about how large language models could be used to help scientists better understand the neuroscience of how language works, Fedorenko explains that "there are many, many questions that we can now ask that had been totally out of reach: for example, questions about [language] development.”
A study by researchers at MIT and elsewhere has found that both lawyers and non-lawyers use legalese when asked to write about laws, reports June Casagrande for The Los Angeles Times. The "researchers tested the hypothesis by asking 200 participants to write laws prohibiting crimes like drunk driving and burglary,” explains Casagrande. “Then they asked them to write stories about those crimes. The laws they wrote contained unnecessarily long, labyrinthine sentences with lots of parenthetical explanations crammed in. The stories, however, were written simply, without the parenthetical information stuffing.”
Researchers at MIT have uncovered a possible reason why legal documents can be so difficult to read, finding that “convoluted legalese often acts as a way to convey authority,” reports Joe Berkowitz for Fast Company. The researchers “tested whether nonlawyers would end up using legalese if asked to write legal documents,” explains Berkowitz. “In the end, all subjects wrote their laws with complex, center-embedded clauses.”
Researchers at MIT have found that the use of legalese in writing “to assert authority over those less versed in such language,” reports Noor Al-Sibai for Futurism. “By studying this cryptic take on the English language, the researchers are hoping to make legal documents much easier to read in the future,” explains Al-Sibai.
In a letter to the editor of The New York Times, Alfred Ironside, the MIT vice president for communications, addresses the necessary role staff play at MIT. “At MIT, the research and education enterprise requires far more to thrive than our outstanding faculty alone,” writes Ironside. He adds that the Institute’s staff are essential to “running a top-flight research organization where breakthrough discoveries and innovations provide continuous service to the nation.”
MIT researchers have found that lawyers prefer, and better understand, simplified texts, rather than legalese, reports Jesse Greenspan for Scientific American. “The researchers presented 105 U.S. attorneys with contract excerpts written in both “legalese” and plain English and tested their comprehension and recall for each,” explains Greenspan. “While the attorneys outperformed laypeople overall, they still found the legalese contracts harder to grasp than those written in plain English.”
Wall Street Journal reporter Emily Bobrow spotlights Laurel Braitman PhD '13 for her work teaching writing and communication skills to healthcare workers. “We need people who are trained in science and medicine to be able to tell stories about what matters in public health in a way that makes people listen,” says Braitman. “But to do that, they have to be in touch with what they really feel.”
Researchers at MIT have found that lawyers “have an easier time remembering legal documents written in simple English over those filled with so-called legalese,” reports Ed Cara for Gizmodo. “On average, for instance, lawyers scored 45% on a test that asked them to recall documents written in legalese, compared to the average 38% scored by nonlawyers,” explains Cara. “But the lawyers’ score also increased to over 50% when they were given the simplified version.”
Writing for Forbes, senior lecturer Bill Fischer highlights lessons from the late pianist Ahmad Jamal on leadership and communication. “As a result, there are leadership lessons to be learned from the great jazz-masters, and in the case of delivering a message, or sharing ideas, Ahmad Jamal’s lessons are well-worth paying attention to,” writes Fischer.
Boston Globe reporter Kevin Lewis spotlights a new study by MIT researchers that explores why it is often so difficult to comprehend the language in legal contracts. “In other words, what sets lawyers apart from laypeople is not necessarily their greater familiarity with legal concepts,” writes Lewis. “It’s that they’ve been trained in how to handle such esoteric language.”
Forbes reporter Derek Newton spotlights Nwanacho Nwana '20, co-founder of education startup Valfee, a communications program aimed at engaging students with public speaking skills. “We truly believe that feedback-based learning is optimal for long term growth, and that the future of student learning is gamified,” Nwana tells Newton.
NPR’s Laurel Wamsley speaks with Ethan Zuckerman, director of MIT’s Center for Civic Media, about how to create a better social network. Zuckerman, reports Wamsley, thinks a decentralized structure is part of the answer and says the algorithm that sits behind the news feed is ripe for reinvention.
In a New York Times article, Amy Carleton, a lecturer in the Comparative Media Studies/Writing program at MIT, writes about her decision to donate one of her kidneys to her stepfather. “It was his quiet support for all of those years that kept me afloat, even if he often stayed in the background,” Carleton writes.