Close
Story Time

Atlanta Science Festival – The Amazing Race

April 4, 2025

It’s interesting that my journey with STEMComm began with a reflection on the Atlanta Science Festival, and now, as I wrap up my final semester, I find myself doing the same. This time, I’m writing from the perspective of a two-time coordinator of this event. It’s been a full-circle moment: challenging, rewarding, and meaningful.

This semester, our VIP team decided to theme the event around The Amazing Race, a reality show where teams compete in various challenges across the globe. We adapted the concept to create a science-themed race, where participants completed interactive challenges that taught them about various scientific topics such as light, conductors, and encryption. The idea was to make learning fun through friendly competition.

I worked with Christie and Qiaoni on our subteam, Speed of Light, to design a physical and mental activity based on light and color. Our physical challenge, Prism Effect, introduced participants to concepts in optics, specifically refraction and dispersion. Refraction is the bending of light as it moves from one medium to another and dispersion is where different wavelengths bend differently (Biggs, 2024). Using laser pointers and glass prisms, participants had to manipulate the light to create a path hitting a certain number of prisms. Along the way, they learned how white light splits into a spectrum of colors as it bends through different media, and how laser beams, being monochromatic, behave differently.

Our mental challenge focused on the Stroop Effect, a psychological phenomenon that reveals how our brains process conflicting information, referring to a delay in reaction times between congruent and incongruent stimuli (MacLeod, 1991). Participants had to name the color of a word, not the word itself, which became surprisingly difficult when the two didn’t match. For instance, the word “purple” written in green ink, showing an example of incongruent stimuli. On the other hand, congruent stimuli is when the two aspects align, like seeing the word “blue” written in blue ink (Ruhl, 2023). This task demonstrated how cognitive interference affects reaction time, and it opened up conversations about how the brain, like the anterior cingulate cortex, manages conflict.

Example of congruent stimuli
Example of incongruent stimuli

Like any large event, it came with challenges such as managing multiple teams, and directing participant flow. However, our team adapted quickly and it was cool to see how enthusiastic participants were, especially with the hands-on activity involving prisms. I also learned how to tailor communication styles when interacting with younger children, making the experience both educational and fun for a wide range of ages. Through this event I felt fulfilled watching people engage with our activities. Seeing kids light up as they bent laser beams or raced against the Stroop challenge timer reminded me why we coordinate events. It’s about sparking curiosity, making science engaging, and creating meaningful experiences.

 

 

Sources Cited

Davidson, Douglas J., et al. “Stroop Interference, Practice, and Aging.” Neuropsychology, Development, and Cognition. Section B, Aging, Neuropsychology and Cognition, vol. 10, no. 2, June 2003, pp. 85–98. PubMed Central, https://doi.org/10.1076/anec.10.2.85.14463.

Biggs, Kelvin. “Understanding Optical Prism Types, Functions & Uses – UQG.” UQG Optics, 11 Nov. 2024, https://www.uqgoptics.com/understanding-optical-prism-types-functions-and-uses/.

MacLeod, Colin M., and Penny A. MacDonald. “Interdimensional Interference in the Stroop Effect: Uncovering the Cognitive and Neural Anatomy of Attention.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, vol. 4, no. 10, Oct. 2000, pp. 383–91. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01530-8.

Okayasu, Moe, et al. “The Stroop Effect Involves an Excitatory–Inhibitory Fronto-Cerebellar Loop.” Nature Communications, vol. 14, no. 1, Jan. 2023, p. 27. www.nature.com, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-35397-w.

Prism | Definition, Refraction, Types, & Facts | Britannica. 6 Feb. 2025, https://www.britannica.com/technology/prism-optics.

Stroop Effect Experiment in Psychology. 2 Oct. 2023, https://www.simplypsychology.org/stroop-effect.html.

0Likes
About Author

You May Also Like

Articles, Story Time, today i learned (til)
The Science Behind Dyeing My Hair (with cool pics!)
Articles, Story Time
A Letter to Fellow Struggling Students
Field Notes, Story Time, today i learned (til)
Children Response to Conflicting Information
Articles, Field Notes, Story Time
HackMITea: A Hackathon From the Eyes of a Physics Major

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.