Filter by author: Marina Joubert

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools are increasingly present in academic writing workflows, and their irresponsible use poses a growing threat to the integrity of scholarly publishing. In this editorial, we highlight the emergence of AI-generated references, or so-called “ghost references”, as a specific concern for JCOM and the wider academic community. We consider how AI tools like large language models can produce convincing yet fictitious citations that might bypass standard peer review. Also, we reaffirm JCOM's policy requiring full disclosure of any generative AI use in preparing manuscripts, remind authors that the responsibility for accuracy and integrity lies with those whose names appear on submissions, and outline our commitment to reject, withdraw, or retract manuscripts found to contain fabricated content at any stage of the publication process. As a journal dedicated to science communication, JCOM maintains a strong focus on the honest and transparent development of knowledge.

Research organisations routinely reach out to the media via press releases to announce research news and promote advances in science. This paper explores the presence of basic and applied research in press releases issued through EurekAlert!. Using a scientometric approach to classify research papers featured in press releases into basic and applied research, we found that more than half of the press releases in our dataset were related to basic research. This trend was particularly notable in life and earth sciences, physical sciences, and engineering fields. In contrast, press releases in the biomedical and health sciences, as well as in social sciences and humanities, were more frequently associated with applied research. Additionally, we present findings on the similarity and readability of press releases compared to their corresponding research papers, which confirm the role of institutional press officers in making research papers more accessible to the public and media. This adaptation appears to be more pronounced for basic research.

In the context of a special issue of this journal focused on teaching science communication, we present a map of the geographical distribution of 122 science communication teaching programmes from 31 countries around the world. This mapping study resulted from a collaboration between members of the PCST Teaching Forum and the research team at GlobalSCAPE, a research project funded by the European Commission to explore the global state of science communication. Our findings highlight the concentration of these programmes in the U.S.A. and Europe, and the dominance of English as the language of instruction. We ponder the causes and implications of the disparities in opportunities for studying science communication in other world regions and languages. The dearth of science communication educational pathways in developing countries may limit the professionalisation of the field, as well as research and evidence-based practice that is locally needed and relevant.

During June 2023, we met with the JCOM editorial board members to reflect on the current status of the journal and strategies for future growth. This editorial provides a snapshot of our position and plans.

The Covid-19 pandemic escalated demand for scientific explanations and guidance, creating opportunities for scientists to become publicly visible. In this study, we compared characteristics of visible scientists during the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic (January to December 2020) across 16 countries. We find that the scientists who became visible largely matched socio-cultural criteria that have characterised visible scientists in the past (e.g., age, gender, credibility, public image, involvement in controversies). However, there were limited tendencies that scientists commented outside their areas of expertise. We conclude that the unusual circumstances created by Covid-19 did not change the phenomenon of visible scientists in significant ways.

Our 20th anniversary this year is a special milestone for JCOM. It is a time to reflect on our past performance and future prospects. We pause to consider the activities of this journal, and the broad field of science communication over the past 20 years.

The 2022 Ecsite conference took place in Heilbronn, Germany, from 2–4 June after two years of virtual meetings due to the Covid-19 pandemic. This review presents some highlights of this event, including two memorable keynote talks by disability activist Sinéad Burke and author/educator Lucy Hawking.

We investigated pro- and anti-vaccine rhetoric on two South African Facebook pages to identify the nature, sources and justifications of the vaccine-related claims published on these pages. Our dataset consisted of 440 Facebook posts made by page administrators during 2019. Statements related to the safety and necessity of vaccines dominated the pro-vaccine page, while the anti-vaccine page focussed primarily on claims about the dangers of vaccines. Posts on both pages frequently contained content shared from within Facebook, with much of the content originating from the United States. Both pages made equal use of scientific justifications (i.e. published journal articles) to support claims, and most of these articles were published in accredited journals. The authors hope that a better understanding of the nature, sources and justifications of pro- and anti-vaccine rhetoric may lead to more constructive dialogue about vaccines, including the ongoing debate about COVID-19 vaccines.

In this editorial, we reflect on our new roles as Editor-in-Chief and Deputy Editor of JCOM. We acknowledge the work of previous editors of JCOM, the Editorial Office and the wider JCOM community who have contributed to the success of the journal. We introduce the new Editorial Board and future directions for the journal, and we encourage suggestions from authors, reviewers and readers for taking the journal forward.

Twelve researchers from 11 countries used autoethnographic techniques, keeping diaries over 10 weeks of the COVID-19 crisis, to observe and reflect on changes in the role and cultural authority of science during important stages of viral activity and government action in their respective countries. We followed arguments, discussions and ideas generated by mass and social media about science and scientific expertise, observed patterns and shifts in narratives, and made international comparisons. During regular meetings via video conference, the participating researchers discussed theoretical approaches and our joint methodology for reflecting on our observations. This project is informed by social representations theory, agenda-setting, and frames of meaning associated with the rise and fall of expertise and trust. This paper presents our observations and reflections on the role and authority of science in our countries from March 10 to May 31, 2020. This is the first stage of a longer-term project that aims to identify, analyse and compare changes in science-society relationships over the course of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.