Topic description: Societal challenges like migration movements, climate change, or digitization show that there is a pressing need for informed expertise from virtually all fields of research. Yet, scientific knowledge often remains within its domain and reaches civil society only indirectly and delayed. In a 5-year citation window, 27% of the papers from natural sciences and 32% of the papers from social sciences remain uncited.
Expressed pointedly: While the need for scientific expertise is perhaps greater than ever, scientists produce papers that nobody reads. Moreover, neologisms like “alternative facts” suggest a noticeable loss of the scientific authority in the public opinion. All this raises a difficult question: What is the impact of science? In the next couple of weeks we will address this issue in more detail.
What is your take on Impact? We welcome contributions on this topic.
An interview with Kai Chan and his strategies to seek the combination of both kinds of impacts.
“Scientists who oversell their results are a big problem for science.”
The case for decentralized, trusted platforms for the dissemination of scientific information and attribution.
Christopher Aiden-Lee Jackson researches the Earth’s structure. In his opinion, scientists have to care more about informing their findings to policymakers.
Twitter is a centerpiece of modern public communication. But the question must be asked: Is Twitter worth all that attention?
Open Science advocate Shakib Wassey tells how a digital platform for open scientific publication and interactive evaluation could change scientific publishing.
3 questions to Jeremy M. Berg about the future of scholarly publishing.
No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.