Five Ways the Cosmetics Industry Can Support Good Science Communication

By Gail Houston, Becki Murray, Victoria Kudzorji, Sunera Chowdhury & Amber Lewis • Mentees, The Eco Well SciComm cohort | Cohort editorial support from Annika Lagut PhD, Luciana Smaldore and Jen Novakovich

Editor’s Note: This article was written as an extension of The Eco Well’s science communication mentorship initiative, with the support of Happi.

At The Eco Well’s Science of Science Communication E-Summit, a series of presentations brought together cross-disciplinary scientists to discuss the science behind science communication. This article contains key insights from the summit, with lessons for the cosmetics industry.

Communication shapes many of the choices beauty consumers make each day. It can influence which lipstick we believe to last longer, whether we trust that an ingredient is safe and how we understand the possible benefits of a product. However, these choices are made in an environment crowded with confusing and conflicting information.

Corporations invest significant resources into research and development, less so into science communication. Yet scientific information has limited value when people outside the scientific community cannot understand or use it. As was highlighted by P&G’s Jeni Thomas, PhD and Rolanda Wilkerson, PhD, for the beauty industry, science communication is a coherent long-term investment and responsibility for companies. Good science communication helps consumers evaluate claims while building trust in the companies and experts sharing the information. Behind the scenes this goes even further–what are raw material brochures if not written science communication? Clearer science communication is beneficial at every step of a cosmetic product’s life. 

What Can Go Wrong When Science is Communicated Poorly?

Confusion and misinformation can spread quickly, creating unnecessary fear that ultimately can direct the behavior of an entire market, sometimes with dire consequences.

Our diminishingly small preservative palettes in beauty are a striking example of this. Due to broad misconceptions that have gained traction, brands now must opt for less reliable preservatives to meet consumer sentiment. It should be emphasized that many of the preservatives we are moving away from have robust long-term safety support as they are used in cosmetics.

The associated potential consequences are far from innocuous. Microbial contamination remains the largest public health risk associated with cosmetic products. Ever-limiting choice among them removes important tools in our formulator toolkit to keep consumers safe.

At the heart of this issue is science that wasn’t well explained, compounded by marketing decisions that reinforced the misconceptions.

Science-Supported SciComm Strategies

Beauty has a misinformation problem, which presents a significant challenge for the cosmetics industry. In addition to public opinion limiting ingredients, misinformation-driven class action lawsuits are increasing the cost of doing business. Addressing misinformation should therefore be a priority, but effectively doing so requires strategy. Thankfully, there is a lot of research already looking into this. The following science-supported strategies can help the cosmetics industry combat misinformation.

• Prebunking: This is one of the most effective SciComm strategies. It involves preparing people against misinformation before it’s encountered, arming them with the tools to better recognize misinformation in the future. This technique ranges from preparing audiences about specific misinformation that is starting to trend, e.g. “if you hear this, it’s not true and here’s why.” It could also involve helping audiences understand common warning signs for misinformation, e.g. overly emotional language, reliance on biases (e.g. natural=better), or binary explanations for complex topics.

• Debunking: When misinformation has already spread, this is where debunking comes in. As Steve Lewandowsky, PhD explained at the summit, “the best way to overcome misinformation is to not just correct it, but replace it with an alternative explanation.” One helpful approach is the Fact Sandwich, where you begin with the correct information, mention the false claim only once to explain why it is misleading and close by restating the fact. Responses to misinformation should be clear, timely, and delivered repeatedly. Repetition is important for helping to make the explanations stick!

• Simplicity versus nuance: While not a defined strategy, understanding how simple vs nuanced an explanation is required for a given topic is crucial for SciComm success. There is a balance between explanations that are simple enough to be easily understood vs oversimplification, where the explanation may lead to misunderstandings. Imagery can be an excellent tool to lean on in navigating this equation. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.

Current Barriers to Good Science Communication

Even when effective science communication strategies are understood, putting them into practice can be challenging. Scientific findings compete with influencer content, marketing claims, personal stories, and misinformation, often on platforms designed to reward speed and engagement rather than accuracy.

Effective science communication is not simply about giving people more information. People’s responses are shaped not only by knowledge, but also by trust, identity, fear, cost, convenience, and past experiences. Even technically accurate information can therefore fail to connect if it comes from a source the audience does not trust, or ignores the practical concerns people face.

Effective SciComm therefore should lead with empathy, and take a collaborative approach. For example, there are already science communicators on social media who’ve gained the trust of their following and an understanding of the platforms they frequent. There is a significant opportunity for collaboration between industry and these science communicators, and need for support to keep these trusted voices going.

Five Ways To Support Good Science Communication

When engaging in science communication, here are some things to keep in mind:

1. Understand that the average consumer is science-curious. In general, people are delighted to find out how things work and to be brought behind the mysterious curtain of product development.

2. Fund science communication. SciComm consists of a variety of niche skills that not everyone is interested in acquiring. Think of adding a scicomm team not only for consumer-faced projects but also to translate between your R&D and marketing efforts. Better understanding between departments leads to better products.  

3. Use the right experts. Don’t be afraid to bring in experts from other fields when their knowledge adds useful context. For example, a sustainability professional could speak on a cosmetic’s lifecycle assessment, strengthening the product’s reception by consumers interested in greener alternatives.

4. Be clear and specific. Claims such as “contains peptides” or “clinically proven” may sound meaningful, but consumers need to know what those terms mean. Which peptides? What are the INCIs of the key ingredients?  How and for how long was the product tested? Who were the study participants?

5. Make transparency central. Always explain the support behind your claims. That includes sharing appropriate details from consumer studies or product testing, and communicating openly when products are changed, discontinued, or recalled. When working with influencers, it is your responsibility that they present claims accurately. Strong communication is a two-way street. Listening to questions and responding clearly can help consumers feel respected while building trust in the brand and the science behind its products.

SciComm Is Good For Everyone

Good science communication does more than make complex information easier to understand. It helps people recognize misinformation, evaluate evidence, understand uncertainty, and make more informed beauty decisions. Supporting good science communication requires ongoing effort. Consumers are interested in science and it’s our responsibility to be as transparent as possible. Companies should listen to consumer concerns and work with experts from different fields when broader knowledge is needed. Ultimately, good science communication is good news for everyone: consumers, brands, scientific professionals and the industry as a whole.

More on the Science of Science Communication eBook, can be found here: https://www.theecowell.com/ebooks.