Applied Filters
- Science Communication
- Cooke, Steven JRemove filter
- Open AccessRemove filter
Journal Title
Publication Date
Author
- Sopinka, Natalie M2
- Attinello, Kayla1
- Bennett, Joseph R1
- Bergman, Jordanna N1
- Boon, Sarah1
- Buxton, Rachel T1
- Coristine, Laura E1
- Danylchuk, Andy J1
- DeRosa, Maria C1
- Gallagher, Austin J1
- Hajdasz, Adrianne C1
- Hammerschlag, Neil1
- Lenda, Magdalena1
- Lin, Hsien-Yung1
- Nguyen, Vivian M1
- Owens, Brian L1
- Rivest, Stephanie A1
- Rochman, Chelsea M1
- Skubel, Rachel A1
- Tran Nguyen, Thuong1
- Young, Nathan1
Access Type
1 - 3of3
Save this search
Please login to be able to save your searches and receive alerts for new content matching your search criteria.
Filters
| Search Name | Searched On |
|---|---|
| [Subject Areas: Science Communication] AND [Author: Cooke, Steven J] (3) | 31 Oct 2024 |
You do not have any saved searches
- OPEN ACCESS
- Steven J. Cooke,
- Austin J. Gallagher,
- Natalie M. Sopinka,
- Vivian M. Nguyen,
- Rachel A. Skubel,
- Neil Hammerschlag,
- Sarah Boon,
- Nathan Young, and
- Andy J. Danylchuk
It is increasingly common for scientists to engage in sharing science-related knowledge with diverse knowledge users—an activity called science communication. Given that many scientists now seek information on how to communicate effectively, we have generated a list of 16 important considerations for those interested in science communication: (1) Define what science communication means to you and your research; (2) Know—and listen to—your target audience; (3) Consider a diverse but coordinated communication portfolio; (4) Draft skilled players and build a network; (5) Create and seize opportunities; (6) Be creative when you communicate; (7) Focus on the science in science communication; (8) Be an honest broker; (9) Understand the science of science communication; (10) Think like an entrepreneur; (11) Don’t let your colleagues stop you; (12) Integrate science communication into your research program; (13) Recognize how science communication enhances your science; (14) Request science communication funds from grants; (15) Strive for bidirectional communication; and (16) Evaluate, reflect, and be prepared to adapt. It is our ambition that the ideas shared here will encourage readers to engage in science communication and increase the effectiveness of those already active in science communication, stimulating them to share their experiences with others. - OPEN ACCESS
- Natalie M. Sopinka,
- Laura E. Coristine,
- Maria C. DeRosa,
- Chelsea M. Rochman,
- Brian L. Owens, and
- Steven J. Cooke
Consider for a moment the rate of advancement in the scientific understanding of DNA. It is formidable; from Fredrich Miescher’s nuclein extraction in the 1860s to Rosalind Franklin’s double helix X-ray in the 1950s to revolutionary next-generation sequencing in the late 2000s. Now consider the scientific paper, the medium used to describe and publish these advances. How is the scientific paper advancing to meet the needs of those who generate and use scientific information? We review four essential qualities for the scientific paper of the future: (i) a robust source of trustworthy information that remains peer reviewed and is (ii) communicated to diverse users in diverse ways, (iii) open access, and (iv) has a measurable impact beyond Impact Factor. Since its inception, scientific literature has proliferated. We discuss the continuation and expansion of practices already in place including: freely accessible data and analytical code, living research and reviews, changes to peer review to improve representation of under-represented groups, plain language summaries, preprint servers, evidence-informed decision-making, and altmetrics. - OPEN ACCESS
- Jordanna N. Bergman,
- Rachel T. Buxton,
- Hsien-Yung Lin,
- Magdalena Lenda,
- Kayla Attinello,
- Adrianne C. Hajdasz,
- Stephanie A. Rivest,
- Thuong Tran Nguyen,
- Steven J. Cooke, and
- Joseph R. Bennett
Given its extensive volume and reach, social media has the potential to widely spread conservation messaging and be a powerful tool to mobilize social change for conserving biodiversity. We synthesized gray and primary academic literature to investigate the effects of social media on wildlife conservation, revealing several overarching benefits and risks. We found that social media can increase pro-conservation behaviours among the public, increase conservation funding, and incite policy changes. Conversely, social media can contribute to species exploitation and illegal trade, cause unprecedented increases in tourism in protected areas, and perpetuate anti-conservation behaviours via misinformation. In most cases, we found that content sharing on social media did not result in a detectable impact on conservation; in this paper, however, we focus on providing examples where conservation impact was achieved. We relate these positive and negative outcomes of social media to psychological phenomena that may influence conservation efforts and discuss limitations of our findings. We conclude with recommendations of best practices to social media administrators, public social media users, nongovernmental organizations, and governing agencies to minimize conservation risks while maximizing beneficial outcomes. By improving messaging, policing online misconduct, and providing guidance for action, social media can help achieve wildlife conservation goals.