{"id":3662,"date":"2021-10-26T17:38:04","date_gmt":"2021-10-26T23:38:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.crpa-acrp-bulletin.ca\/?p=3662"},"modified":"2021-10-26T17:38:04","modified_gmt":"2021-10-26T23:38:04","slug":"le-langage-clair-et-simple-soutient-une-communication-claire-et-inspire-confiance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.crpa-acrp-bulletin.ca\/fr\/2021\/10\/26\/le-langage-clair-et-simple-soutient-une-communication-claire-et-inspire-confiance\/","title":{"rendered":"Le langage clair et simple soutient une communication claire et inspire confiance"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

\"The<\/p>\n

Communicating technical information to a non-technical audience without compromising intent or accuracy can be challenging. Using plain language can help you make your message easier to understand, so it\u2019s no surprise that many radiation protection organizations support the use of plain language.<\/p>\n

When I started writing this article, I wanted to tell you about a new plain language toolkit developed by Evidence for Democracy<\/a> (E4D). As I started writing, I couldn\u2019t help wondering who in the radiation protection community was already using plain language. It turns out there\u2019s a lot of support for plain language communication in your communities.<\/p>\n

So I\u2019m still going to tell you about the E4D toolkit, but then I\u2019m going to share with you some of the reasons plain language is encouraged in radiation protection.<\/p>\n

\"CoverWho is Evidence for Democracy?<\/h2>\n

E4D is a non-partisan Canadian non-profit organization that advocates for evidence-based policy making in government.<\/p>\n

E4D believes science communication needs to be easy to understand for it to be useful to the public and other stakeholders. They also recognize that scientific research can be very complex and technical. It\u2019s not always easy for scientists to translate their work so it can be easily understood by the general public.<\/p>\n

To help technical experts write easy-to-understand summaries of their research, E4D developed a set of tools and best practices to guide public science communication. Preparing Plain Language Summaries: A Toolkit by Evidence for Democracy<\/em><\/a> can be found in the training section of the E4D website. The toolkit is intended to help scientists write plain language summaries, but the advice is applicable to other kinds of plain language writing as well.<\/p>\n

\"PreparingWhat is plain language?<\/h2>\n

According to the International Plain Language Federation<\/a>, \u201ca communication is in\u00a0plain language\u00a0if its wording, structure, and design are so clear that the intended readers can easily find what they need, understand what they find, and use that information.\u201d<\/p>\n

Plain language is clear and direct. It uses common, everyday words in short sentence and short paragraphs. It is designed to help your reader focus on the message without being distracted by complicated language. In the E4D toolkit, author Farah Qaiser reminds scientists that \u201cthe words that are common to you, an expert in your field, may not be common to your audience\u201d (p. 19).<\/p>\n

According to Qaiser, \u201cwhat makes writing in plain language different is the focus on the reader\u201d (p. 5). That is the first rule of plain language: write for your audience. When you write with your reader\u2019s needs in mind, they will be more receptive to your message.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n

Support for plain language in radiation protection<\/h2>\n

\"CNSCCanadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC)<\/h3>\n

CNSC, in REGDOC-3.4.1<\/em>:\u00a0Guide for Applicants and Intervenors Writing CNSC Commission Member Documents<\/em><\/a>, recommends using plain language (3.1.3 Use plain language<\/a>):<\/p>\n

Effective communication relies on plain language. Communicating in plain language means being clear and concise, using short sentences, keeping to the facts and writing in a way that is easy to read and understand.<\/em><\/p>\n

While the Commission depends on [Commission Member Documents] that are technically and legally sound, it is important to convey information in language that is as plain as possible.<\/em><\/p>\n

They go on to provide suggestions to \u201chelp convert complex messages and legal and technical jargon into plain language that is understandable to a wide audience, without compromising the content\u2019s intent or accuracy.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"USUS Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)<\/h3>\n

NRC also advocates for the use of plain language to support their \u201cimportant mission,\u201d which is to \u201cregulate, license, and oversee the nation\u2019s civilian use of nuclear materials to protect both people and the environment.\u201d<\/p>\n

Because this mission is so important, we want you to be informed about\u2014and have a reasonable opportunity to participate meaningfully in\u2014our activities. We see plain writing as a key to achieving that goal. After all, how can you become informed and involved if you don\u2019t understand what we say and write? More importantly, why should you trust us to achieve our mission if we can\u2019t clearly communicate important concepts?<\/em> (Plain Writing and Its Benefits<\/em><\/a>)<\/p>\n

NRC acknowledges that, if they fail to effectively communicate their decisions, which ultimately affect the health and safety of people and the environment, they risk compromising their mission and public confidence in them.<\/p>\n

Although no one knows the true cost of poor communication, the available information suggests it\u2019s high. It isn\u2019t easy to explain complex technical concepts in plain language, but it pays off in positive results like increased public confidence, licensee compliance, and enhanced safety and security.<\/p>\n

Visit NRC\u2019s website to learn more about their plain writing philosophy, techniques, and guidance<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"ICRPInternational Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP)<\/h3>\n

In her 2015 presentation \u201cThe Future of ICRP\u2014Towards a Centenary and Beyond,\u201d given at the ICRP symposium in Seoul, South Korea, chairperson Claire Cousins included \u201cproduce [a] plain language overview of the system of radiological protection and summaries of recommendations\u201d in her eight future plans. She also documented this commitment to plain language in an article of the same name in the Annals of the ICRP<\/em><\/a>:<\/p>\n

ICRP will be considering different ways of working with other organisations to strengthen engagement with the wider radiological protection community. ICRP publications are often complex technical documents, and part of \u201cwider engagement\u201d is to produce a plain language overview of the system of radiological protection and a summary of recommendations.<\/em> (p. 7)<\/p>\n

One of the priorities set out in the 2016\u20132020 ICRP Strategic Plan<\/em><\/a> is \u201cto further promote awareness of the System of Radiological Protection and broaden access to its recommendations\u201d by improving \u201cuser-friendliness of publications, [for example] through plain-language summaries.\u201d<\/p>\n

Producing \u201crecommendations that are easy to understand and apply, inclusive, and accessible to everyone\u201d remains a promise that appears in a banner on the ICRP website<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"FlagInternational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)<\/h3>\n

One of the primary objectives set out in IAEA Safety Standards for Protecting People and the Environment: Criteria for Use in Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency<\/em><\/a> is \u201cto propose a basis for a plain language explanation of the criteria for the public and for public officials that addresses the risks to human health of radiation exposure and provides a basis for a response that is commensurate with the risks\u201d (p. 2).<\/p>\n

Acknowledging that \u201cdecision makers take actions and the public follow instructions best when they understand how the actions provide for the safety of the public\u201d (p. 50), the IAEA standards call for a plain language explanation of the risks to be provided whenever dose levels may result in an emergency exposure situation, \u201cto allow [decision makers and the public] to make informed decisions about what actions they will take\u201d (p. 7).<\/p>\n

Decision makers in an emergency and the public may have only a limited or no understanding of the principles of radiation protection, the risks associated with radiation exposure and the appropriate actions that can be taken to reduce these risks. This Safety Guide therefore also provides a plain language explanation of the operational criteria, to assist in the communication of the purpose of each of the criteria and the associated protective actions and other response actions.<\/em> (p. 3)<\/p>\n

\"EnvironmentalUS Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)<\/h3>\n

In a handbook called Communicating Radiation Risks: Crisis Communications for Emergency Responders<\/em><\/a>, the EPA advises using plain language to cut through the \u201cmental noise\u201d that makes it difficult for people to understand emergency responders during a crisis (p. 10):<\/p>\n

During emotionally charged, high-stress situations, people may experience \u201cmental noise,\u201d an emotional block that can make it difficult to hear, understand, or remember information. Research shows that by following the three steps below, your audience will more easily understand your messages.<\/em><\/p>\n

Keep it simple:<\/strong> Use plain language that avoids jargon and scientifically complex terms.<\/em><\/p>\n

Keep it brief:<\/strong> Make messages for the public brief, concise and clear.<\/em><\/p>\n

Keep it to the point:<\/strong> Follow the \u201c27\/9\/3\u201d rule:<\/em><\/p>\n