importance of scientific communication spreading the news ... · • a new piece of information...

Importance of scientific

communication

Spreading the news and

reaping the benefits

University of Oulu Graduate School

Introduction to Doctoral Training

March 19, 2015

Reseach is communicating

• why communicate

• with whom to communicate

• how to do it

• caveats

Why is research communicating

• science is not an individual endeavour, but driven by

a scientific community

• a new piece of information becomes part of scientific

knowledge by a gradual process of approval

-> communicating with one’s own scientific

community is an essential part of research

-> by communicating a researcher establishes his/her

position in the scientific community

-> learning the means and methods of communicating is

an essential part of learning to do research

Communication in research

• target audiences:

• colleagues in the same / close research field(s)

• funders, supervisors, administrators

• colleagues in a wider sense (physicians, teachers…)

• the public

• different objectives, channels – and language

• how to succeed in any of these:

• analyze the situation

• address the reader / listener / mediator (journalists!)…

• use appropriate language and formulations

Scholarly journals

• forum for discussion and new knowledge

formulation in scientific communities

• tasks: social, archiving, distributing

• number grows continuously

– those publishing original studies

– abstract journals

– review journals

• essential characteristic: peer review of

offered manuscripts

Scholarly journals –

an innovation from the 17th century

• more and more

specialization…

• peer review practice

developed starting

at the end of the

19th century

Derek J. de Solla Price:

Little Science, Big Science ...

and Beyond, 1986

Manuscript in a scholarly journal

referees / reviewers

editors of the journal author(s) print

Publication ideologies

of scholarly journals • traditional:

• scholarly society or commercial publisher

• subscribers pay for a paper journal and/or right to use an

electronic journal

• for authors either free of charge or subject to charge

• open access publishing:

• authors pay

• for readers (often) free of charge, an electronic journal open to all

• e.g. Public Library of Science (www.plos.org)

Biomed Central (www.biomedcentral.com)

• Education Research Global Observatory

(http://www.ergobservatory.info/ejdirectory.html)

Directory of

Open Access

Journals

DOAJ

www.doaj.org

Publication forums –

researcher’s point of view

• journals in one’s own scientific discipline

or closer field

• journals in the disciplines of scientific

collaborators

• general scientific journals

• journals in one’s own

scientific discipline or

closer field

• journals in the disciplines

of scientific collaborators

• general scientific journals

Publication forums –

researcher’s point of view

• journals in one’s own

scientific discipline or closer

field

• journals in the disciplines of

scientific collaborators

• general scientific journals

Publication forums –

researcher’s point of view

• basic journals of one’s own

scientific discipline

• journals of the disciplines of

scientific collaborators

• general scientific journals

Publication forums –

researcher’s point of view

What are the differences between these

• general scientific journals

• subject and results must be ”generally interesting”

• better to have media appeal (”mediaseksikäs”…)

• journals in one’s own discipline or closer field

• reflect the interests of one’s closest colleagues

• journals of scientific collaborators

• reflect the interests of another discipline

-> choice between these affects what results are

presented and how…

A scholarly article must

enable the reader to

• assess the observations reported

• reproduce the observations or

experiments made, if (s)he wants/needs

• evaluate whether the conclusions made

are adequate

Ethics for research communication

• thorough knowledge of scientific literature

and fair recognition of others

• requirements of authorship / contributorship

• honest reporting of results

• due diligence and integrity when acting as

referee

• avoiding exaggeration of the novelty or

(practical) significance of one’s own results

(in particular when addressing the public)

How to start

• sharpen your tools

– writing skills

– use of English and other relevant languages

– ethics and copyright issues

– public speaking

• use every opportunity of presenting

you work

– remember the context

– enjoy discussing your work with others