Biological mechanisms are, by their nature, dynamic. They involve interaction, causality, and specific sequences that unfold over time. Standard scientific communication, however, tends to use static media that cannot represent time. This means that when you show a complex signalling pathway on a slide, your audience must first decode the spatial relationships, then infer the temporal ones on top of it.
And that inferential work takes effort.
Research into visualisation decision-making suggests it draws heavily on working memory, a slow, contemplative process with limited capacity. When a static figure is used to represent a living process, the audience expends that capacity on corrective mental gymnastics rather than on engaging with the science itself. Many biological mechanisms are too complex for a few slides, too dynamic for static figures, and too novel to be quickly reconstructed by someone outside the immediate discipline.
Video 1: DNA Repair After Genome Editing. This video shows the cellular DNA repair response to a Site-Specific Double-Strand Break, which is an important determinant of therapeutic outcome in genome editing approaches.
Enjoying this article? Get hard-won lab wisdom like this delivered to your inbox 3x a week.
Join over 65,000 fellow researchers saving time, reducing stress, and seeing their experiments succeed. Unsubscribe anytime.
Next issue goes out tomorrow; don’t miss it.
How Scientific Animation Can Represent Sequence and Causality
Animation works differently from static diagrams. Rather than asking the audience to mentally construct these sequences, an animation shows them what interacts with what, where it happens, and in what order. That significantly lightens the cognitive burden for the audience. Instead of decoding and reconstructing, they can take in the information more directly.
Studies show that students who observe animations of complex biological processes, such as apoptosis and viral replication, in controlled settings retain more information (up to 21 days later) than those who observe static graphics. This is because motion encodes a sense of sequence and causality that a still image cannot.
Interpretive Drift in Cross-Disciplinary Teams
There is a second problem that static diagrams carry, beyond confusion: variation in interpretation. In a multi-disciplinary team, a biologist, a chemist, and a clinician may look at the same schematic and reach genuinely different conclusions about what is happening. Each person fills the gaps with their own prior knowledge, and there is no shared reference to resolve the differences.
Animation achieves this through a single, controlled visual explanation. When the order and interplay of a sequence of events is clarified, it leaves less room for divergent interpretation. This creates more space for conversation around interpreting data and understanding the risk.
Video 2: White Blood Cell-Mediated Attack and Destruction of Healthy Cells. This animation illustrates how white blood cells release cytokines onto healthy cells, initiating immune responses that ultimately lead to the destruction of normal tissue in autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis.
When to Commission a Scientific Animation
Scientific animation is an investment of time and resources, and it is not the right tool for every programme or dataset. Before you rush to commission a piece, consider the following questions:
- Is the causal sequence of the mechanism such that a static diagram cannot convey it?
- Does misunderstanding happen again and again in meetings despite clarifying?
- Is the same diagram being interpreted differently by multiple disciplines?
- Is the timing or sequence of events important to the scientific argument?
If the answer to most of these is yes, animation is likely to earn its place. If the mechanism is still speculative at every step, or if your audience only needs a static reference, it may not be the right time to introduce animation. In these cases, you could use a diagram instead.
Scientific animation tends to be most genuinely useful when a mechanism is too complex for a few slides, too dynamic for static figures, or too novel to be quickly understood by a non-specialist audience. Tactical use cases include:
- Pre-clinical or platform-stage programmes: Animation can communicate future intent and downstream effects without exaggerating the current data. It is especially helpful when data is still coming together, allowing you to visualise the intended mechanism before every piece is in place.
- Partnering and fundraising: A clear visual language can help a mechanism stick in the minds of investors, differentiating your platform from competitors. It additionally ensures the science travels well inside large organisations, even when you are not there to present it.
- Internal alignment: Animation compresses the cycle of explanation and alignment. It reduces dependence on a single key scientist repeating the same explanation, and it often surfaces risks and assumptions earlier in the process than a series of slides would.
How Storyboarding Surfaces Mechanistic Gaps
One thing that surprises many scientists is that the value of an animation project lies in the production process as much as the final video. Because an animator cannot hand-wave a step in a binding event, every gap in the mechanistic narrative has to be resolved before it reaches the screen. Risks and assumptions surface during storyboarding, which frequently leads to faster internal alignment on the science itself.
To approach this responsibly, expect a rigorous briefing process:
- The kickoff: This refers to your audience and the type of behaviour you want to drive. The target is to convey one key message. One useful discipline before any kickoff is to finish the sentence: “After watching this, my audience will understand that X happens because Y.” If you can’t finish that sentence clearly, then your brief is not yet ready.
- Scripting and alignment: Before any expensive visuals are created, the scientific narrative is described in a script. At this stage, any claims you make need to be subjected to medical and regulatory review to ensure they are all supportable. PhD-qualified medical writers usually develop scripts to maintain the scientific integrity of the content.
- Storyboarding: During the storyboarding phase, you can check that the “camera” is on the right biological interactions and that the visual hierarchy is answering the scientific argument before the full production process.
Matching Animation Style to Mechanistic Certainty
A common concern for scientists is that an animation might oversell or imply a level of mechanistic certainty that the data does not yet support. This is a legitimate risk, and different animation styles are suited to different levels of certainty.
- Cinematic 3D: Best suited for recognized mechanisms (MOA/MOD) where understanding is key. This style maintains scientific credibility while being very engaging.
- Motion graphics and abstract styles: Better for earlier concepts or systems biology, where the precise molecular structures aren’t fully developed yet. Concepts that are abstract (like shapes and metaphors) avoid implying specificity that the data can’t support.
When the mechanics are still speculative, when the audience just needs a static reference diagram, or when the choice of visual style would imply detail not supported by the data, animation is less appropriate. In those instances, a well-crafted visual may suffice, and there’s no need to animate anything that the data does not support.
Working with a specialised scientific animation partner is one way to negotiate this balance. Agencies with experience in the biotech and pharma sectors typically employ PhD-qualified medical writers who bridge the gap between bench science and visual communication. The aim is to ensure the visual model reflects the underlying mechanism accurately while remaining interpretable to a non-scientific audience.
Video 3: Hormone Signalling at the Membrane. This animation highlights the dynamic environment of the cell membrane, where hormone receptors, such as the insulin receptor and GLP-1 receptor, traverse the lipid bilayer to initiate intracellular signalling cascades.
Take-Home Message
Ensuring the understanding of a biological mechanism means controlling how it is shown to your audience. If you find yourself explaining the same sequence of events in every meeting, or if cross-disciplinary conversations keep drifting into confusion over basic interactions, it is worth considering whether the visual medium is doing enough of the work.
Often, when living biological systems are represented as static 2D figures, the work of mentally reconstructing the sequence falls to the audience. Animation gives your audience one clear, shared model of the mechanism that reflects the sequence and causality you actually mean. The mechanism is shown in the sequence and causality you intend.
To see some further examples of medical animation, please visit: www.grapheneanimation.com
References
Padilla LM, Creem-Regehr SH, Hegarty M, Stefanucci JK. 2018. Decision making with visualizations: a cognitive framework across disciplines. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications. 3:29.
Frank R. 2004. Restricting grammatical complexity. Cognitive Science. 28(5):669–697.
O’Day DH. 2007. The value of animations in biology teaching: a study of long-term memory retention. CBE—Life Sciences Education. 6(3):217–223.
You made it to the end—nice work! If you’re the kind of scientist who likes figuring things out without wasting half a day on trial and error, you’ll love our newsletter. Get 3 quick reads a week, packed with hard-won lab wisdom. Join FREE here.
