Loading...
Editorial: Geoscience communication - Planning to make it publishable
Hillier, John Welsh, Katharine Stiller-Reever, Mathew Priestley, Rebecca Roop, Heidi Lanza, Tiziana Illingworth, Sam
Hillier, John
Welsh, Katharine
Stiller-Reever, Mathew
Priestley, Rebecca
Roop, Heidi
Lanza, Tiziana
Illingworth, Sam
Advisors
Editors
Other Contributors
EPub Date
Publication Date
2021-10-27
Submitted Date
Collections
Files
Other Titles
Abstract
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 Geoscience Communication (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.
Citation
Hillier, J. K., Welsh, K. E., Stiller-Reeve, M., Priestley, R. K., Roop, H. A., Lanza, T., & Illingworth, S. (2021). Editorial: Geoscience communication–planning to make it publishable. Geoscience Communication, 4, 493-506. 10.5194/gc-4-493-2021
Publisher
Copernicus Publications
Journal
Geoscience Communication
Research Unit
DOI
10.5194/gc-4-493-2021
PubMed ID
PubMed Central ID
Type
Article
Language
Description
Series/Report no.
ISSN
2569-7102
EISSN
2569-7110