SciArt community reflections spark a desire for Third Spaces

At the end of 2025, we published a JCOM paper that grew out of a particularly engaging and extremely enjoyable collaboration between Karleigh Groves, Fanuel Muindi, and myself, where we discussed how examining science and art collaborations through a social psychology lens reveals the need for Third Spaces. This essay contributes to the existing literature on the relationships between science, art, and their practitioners. In a nutshell, in our essay:

• We examine the evolving field of SciArt (Science + Art) and the personal and interpersonal challenges that arise in collaborations between artists and scientists. 
• Drawing on social psychology, we argue that overcoming collaboration barriers requires more than simply intersecting the two fields within existing institutional environments. 
• We advocate for Third Spaces as new, independent environments where practitioners build a shared group identity, establish group norms, and define collective goals, to promote balanced collaboration, exploration, and innovation.
  

From the outset, this project was never meant to be a closed-door conversation. Instead, we envisioned it as a starting point for exchange among those who are already working at the intersection of science and art, those who have already created Third Spaces, and those who are curious to see what that looks like or would like to join one.

To support this, we experimented with a different format: we shared our paper on LinkedIn and invited readers to contribute their perspectives through a short form, where we asked to share any benefits or challenges associated with Third Spaces for science and art. The response exceeded our expectations: the post sparked great engagement, with over 270 people reacting or reposting and more than 30 art, science, and SciArt practitioners and curators from diverse disciplines (e.g., biochemistry, cell biology, neuroesthetics, science communication, social sciences, graphic art, neuroscience, and environmental justice, to name a few), sharing their perspectives and reflections through LinkedIn comments or via our submission form:

The wide-ranging backgrounds and expertise of the practitioners we engaged with is a clear sign that the SciArt community is buzzing. They reveal a clear desire and curiosity for collaborative spaces that bring together diverse disciplines, helping move beyond the science–art dichotomy and fostering more diverse ways of thinking and interacting with one another. The illustration below, created by illustrator and visual facilitator Laura Moya, captures some of the most striking contributions and gives physical form to the idea of Third Space as shaped by the practitioners themselves:

Supporting what we discuss in our essay, contributing practitioners pointed to several persistent barriers to science–art collaboration. Interdisciplinary work, they noted, is often hindered by institutional structures and hierarchical, gatekeeping cultures, in which “artists [are] treated as ‘the help’” and public-facing scientists are looked down on by peers as “less pure scientists.”

Many respondents traced these challenges back to a deeply entrenched binary model of science and art.

Breaking down this divide, they argue, requires moving beyond “prejudice,” “power imbalances,” and “rigid expectations,” as well as the fear of “failure” or of producing work perceived as lacking “significant scientific merit.” Others highlighted more structural constraints, including “constraints of habit standards,” professional “obligations,” and “profit-oriented goals or conventional funding models.” 

These barriers make the existence of intersecting spaces or Third Spaces not very common and the creation of Third Spaces “a time-intensive and resource-demanding process” that “might not be sustainable or long-term.”

While these obstacles are widely acknowledged, they are often experienced as frustrating, especially due to the sense of non-belonging and isolation that some feel in siloed spaces. As one contributor put it, “I’ve never really felt like I belonged in either science or art,” while another noted, “I am too Sci-Tech-Med-Ed for Arts and too Tech-Art-Med-Ed for Science,” and a third observed, “both areas can be intimidating to get into if you’re not a professional of either.” 

This shared experience of exclusion underscores the need for spaces where a “neutral ground for discussion” is promoted and that “respect both worlds.”

Taken together, hearing from practitioners who have been reimagining their own identities and community spaces underscores the need for Third Spaces and the opportunities they provide. Overall, 83% of survey respondents answered “Yes” to the question in our form that asked “Is the creation of Third Spaces beneficial for fostering more fruitful, balanced, and innovative science–art interdisciplinary collaborations?” while 17% responded, “It depends.” Practitioners emphasized that these spaces allow participants to “think laterally,” “step outside the box,” and gain “a broader perspective” by loosening methodological constraints, fostering “creativity,” and leading to “richer and more innovative outcomes.”

Third Spaces support experimentation beyond conventional boundaries, enabling collaborations to “reveal complex growth patterns and insights that would not emerge in a standard lab” and encouraging discoveries that are “richer, unexpected, and in turn rewarding.”

As one contributor explained, “bringing art and design into my daily scientific practice has opened doors I didn’t know existed.” Contributors further noted that such environments help participants communicate in a more accessible way, moving “out of our jargon mindset” and finding language that “makes sense on a human level.” Beyond practical opportunities, Third Spaces act as a catalyst for reflection and growth. 

They can “unseat both scientists and artists” and encourage a “paradigm shift” toward more open-minded, sustainable, and collaborative ways of working, attracting participants “driven by passion and curiosity” who can “learn from each other.”

Overall, this was an incredible opportunity to learn from practitioners around the globe (see bios below) and highlight how Third Spaces foster forward-looking opportunities by encouraging new ways of thinking, richer experimentation, collaborative identity-building, and innovation. Such spaces hold the potential to reshape the dynamics of both scientific and artistic communities.

Arianna Zuanazzi

I am the Project Collaboration Specialist in the Research Department at the Child Mind Institute: I lead neuroscience data sharing initiatives, manage open science projects, and facilitate the collaboration between internal and external research teams and stakeholders