Making science public: a review of journalists' use of Open Access research.
Making science public: a review of journalists' use of Open Access research.
复制标题
DOI：
10.12688/f1000research.133710.1
复制
发表时间：
2023
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
科学记者处于独特的地位，可以通过以突出其对非专业受众的相关性和影响的方式将研究结果置于背景中并进行交流，来增加开放研究成果的社会影响。然而，目前尚不清楚记者在报道中使用开放获取出版物或预印本等开放研究成果的程度;什么因素促使或限制了这种使用;以及最近在COVID-19大流行期间出现的开放研究激增如何影响了这一点。本文通过对2018年以来发表的相关文献（特别是与COVID-19大流行相关的文献）以及检索日期以外的开创性文章进行综述，对这些问题进行了研究。我们发现，明确检查记者与开放获取出版物或预印本的参与的研究是稀缺的，现有的文献大多是间接地或作为次要的关注点，而不是一个主要的焦点解决这个问题。尽管如此，有限的证据表明，有几个因素可能妨碍记者使用这些产出，因此需要进一步探讨。其中包括过度依赖传统的科学质量评估标准;对开放研究成果的可信度的担忧;以及使用和验证研究结果的挑战。我们还发现，虽然COVID-19疫情鼓励记者探索预印本等开放式研究成果，但这些探索将在多大程度上成为既定的新闻实践仍不清楚。此外，我们注意到，目前的研究绝大多数是作者和重点放在全球北方，特别是美国。最后，我们对未来的研究提出了建议，涉及公平和多样性问题，并更明确地研究开放获取和科学新闻的交叉点。
Science journalists are uniquely positioned to increase the societal impact of open research outputs by contextualizing and communicating findings in ways that highlight their relevance and implications for non-specialist audiences. Yet, it is unclear to what degree journalists use open research outputs, such as open access publications or preprints, in their reporting; what factors motivate or constrain this use; and how the recent surge in openly available research seen during the COVID-19 pandemic has affected this. This article examines these questions through a review of relevant literature published from 2018 onwards—particularly literature relating to the COVID-19 pandemic—as well as seminal articles outside the search dates. We find that research that explicitly examines journalists’ engagement with open access publications or preprints is scarce, with existing literature mostly addressing the topic tangentially or as a secondary concern, rather than a primary focus. Still, the limited body of evidence points to several factors that may hamper journalists’ use of these outputs and thus warrant further exploration. These include an overreliance on traditional criteria for evaluating scientific quality; concerns about the trustworthiness of open research outputs; and challenges using and verifying the findings. We also find that, while the COVID-19 pandemic encouraged journalists to explore open research outputs such as preprints, the extent to which these explorations will become established journalistic practices remains unclear. Furthermore, we note that current research is overwhelmingly authored and focused on the Global North, and the United States specifically. We conclude with recommendations for future research that attend to issues of equity and diversity, and more explicitly examine the intersections of open access and science journalism.