Public communication by research institutes compared across countries and sciences: Building capacity for engagement or competing for visibility?

Clicks: 286
ID: 109888
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #1,029 of 2,056 articles by views in PloS one

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 2,056 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Leading academic institutions, governments, and funders of research across the world have spent the last few decades fretting publicly about the need for scientists and research organisations to engage more widely with the public and be open about their research. While a global literature asserts that public communication has changed from a virtue to a duty for scientists in many countries and disciplines, our knowledge about what research institutions are doing and what factors drive their 'going public' is very limited. Here we present the first cross-national study of N = 2,030 research institutes within universities and large scientific organisations in Brazil, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. We find that institutes embrace communication with non-peers and do so through a variety of public events and traditional news media-less so through new media channels-and we find variation across countries and sciences, yet these are less evident than we expected. Country and disciplinary cultures contribute to the level of this communication, as do the resources that institutes make available for the effort; institutes with professionalised staff show higher activity online. Future research should examine whether a real change in the organisational culture is happening or whether this activity and resource allocation is merely a means to increase institutional visibility.
Reference Key
entradas2020publicplos Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Entradas, Marta;Bauer, Martin W;O'Muircheartaigh, Colm;Marcinkowski, Frank;Okamura, Asako;Pellegrini, Giuseppe;Besley, John;Massarani, Luisa;Russo, Pedro;Dudo, Anthony;Saracino, Barbara;Silva, Carla;Kano, Kei;Amorim, Luis;Bucchi, Massimiano;Suerdem, Ahmet;Oyama, Tatsuo;Li, Yuh-Yuh;
Journal PloS one
Year 2020
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0235191
URL
Keywords
cognition neuropsychiatry neuropsychology

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.