1. What work were you involved in?

At the beginning of the internship, Dr Olivia Jensen, IPUR Lead Scientist (Environment and Climate) sat down for a meeting with the interns to understand what topics sparked our interest, to pursue for a personally written case study. As she shared her ideas for the project, as well as invited our ideas for situations of large-scale miscommunication, the topic of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) caught my eye. As I engaged in further research on the topic, I realised how largely prevalent this issue is, and the overall lack of communication to the public of the negative outcomes faced and mitigation efforts. In defining the scope of my case study, I embarked on finding a country that had long been involved in AMR public campaigns, to analyse what lessons Singapore could take from their attempts.

After increased research, I found that this country would be the United Kingdom. Therefore, my case study analysed the successes and downfalls of two public campaigns regarding AMR in the UK, and addresses what can be done in Singapore for an effective AMR campaign to inform the public of the dangers of antibiotic misuse.

Simultaneously, I was tasked with a new research project launched by Dr Jensen with the intention to identify factors that motivate individuals to promote environmental change, and to understand how to support and amplify their effects. ‘Champions’, as deemed within this project, represent individuals who involve their communities in positive environmental action and act as an intermediary with larger organisations and their community members.

After completing the literature review, involving analysing other identity models for collective action, I used the knowledge I gained from this to begin drafting the interview protocol for these champions. After multiple drafts and test-runs on our coworkers, I began contacting, scheduling and completing interviews with these champions. Finally, we worked on transcribing each interview that we completed in preparation for the data analysis phase of the project.

2. What were your experiences in IPUR?

My experience at IPUR has been extremely insightful and rewarding. While working at IPUR, I felt that I had purpose in my work, working towards a common goal of bridging information and understanding gaps. This is what made my experience so rewarding as I felt I had a direct positive impact on society.

Additionally, I was able to gain valuable insight from my coworkers and my highly regarded supervisor, Dr Jensen. Through my interactions at the institute, I have broadened my perspective on issues and learned through observations of how others tackle adversities. I have thoroughly enjoyed my summer at the institute and have learned real-world skills that I wouldn’t have obtained within my traditional educational pathway. 

3. What lessons did you learn in general and about risk communication?

I learned numerous new skills including how to create an interview protocol and conduct an interview, as this was something that I did not have experience with prior. Oftentimes, participants wouldn’t answer questions the way that we had intended therefore it took probing in order to reach the topics we desired to cover. I learned that interviewing takes a large amount of personable communication skills and had to make sure I was actively listening while preparing to ask my next question.

In a broader sense, I was able to stretch my understanding of public health and risk perception, understanding the intersection between these and the need for professionals to engage in risk communication. As seen with AMR, the issue is currently being exacerbated due to a lack of proper education among the public and communication of the risk of the issue.