Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Comment on gc-2021-13
0
Zitationen
7
Autoren
2021
Jahr
Abstract
<strong class="journal-contentHeaderColor">Abstract.</strong> If you are a geoscientist doing work to achieve impact outside academia or engaging different audiences with the geosciences, are you planning to make this publishable? If so, then plan. Such investigations into how people (academics, practitioners, other publics) respond to geoscience can use pragmatic, simple research methodologies accessible to the non-specialist or be more complex. To employ a medical analogy, first aid is useful and the best option in some scenarios, but calling a medic (i.e. a collaborator with experience of geoscience communication or relevant research methods) provides the contextual knowledge to identify a condition and opens up a diverse, more powerful range of treatment options. Here, we expand upon the brief advice in the first editorial of <i>Geoscience Communication</i> (Illingworth et al., 2018), illustrating what constitutes robust and publishable work in this context, elucidating its key elements. Our aim is to help geoscience communicators plan a route to publication and to illustrate how good engagement work that is already being done might be developed into publishable research.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects
2003 · 10.819 Zit.
Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample
2005 · 8.927 Zit.
SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials
2013 · 6.943 Zit.
The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research
2020 · 5.219 Zit.
The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines
2019 · 4.502 Zit.